Have any of you RL guys visited the track yet? I was curious to see what those 3.5L beasts were producing!

 

8 seconds

 

"....off a cliff, in a hurricaine."

 

I have an Rl loaner from the local Acura stealership while they take their sweet time replacing the tranny on my CLs.

Took the RL out over the weekend and pulled several 15.2 Q mile runs with my Gtech accelerometer.

Really nice car but much slower than my 01 Cls which runs 14.6 - 14.7 depending on the weather.

 

that sucks! thought the RL had more balls than that! thought it could beat the new TL's. guess you buy'em for the luxuries i guess.

 

TL is faster for sure.

 

Gtech are a waste of money theyre only estimated times, who wants estimated times and stats?

 

Who wants to drive only a 1/4 mile?
One of the most meaningless statistics ever used.

 

People who live their lives one quarter mile at a time..

 

Their times are very close to accurate. The 0-60 are within .1 of a second if not right on, and same for the 1/4 mile times.


Here's the other reason they're worth every penny:

If you're into modifying your car, you can tell how much it's helped or hurt you car after a mod.
First establish a baseline w/ a G Tech type timer, and then after the mod, compare.

Even if the times aren't accurate relative to the clock at the track, they're still accurate relative to each run, so you can tell if a mod helped or hurt.

For example, your 0-60 says 6.1 seconds on the GTech, then you mod and it's now 5.5. You know you've knocked off about a half second on your time. Even if the actual times are 6.0 and 5.4.... who cares?

 

There was an article published in Car & Driver or Motor Trend within the last couple of years that tested the Gtech and it's competition and it was within 1/10 of actual.

 

You obviously should never drive again after that statement! You are meaningless!

 

C/D TEST RESULTS
ACCELERATION Seconds
Zero to 30 mph 2.4
40 mph: 3.5
50 mph: 5.1
60 mph: 6.7
70 mph: 8.6
80 mph: 11.3
90 mph: 14.1
100 mph: 17.1
110 mph: 21.8
120 mph: 29.3
130 mph: 40.2
Street start, 5-60 mph: 7.8
Top-gear acceleration, 30-50 mph: 4.4
50-70 mph: 5.4
Standing 1/4-mile: 15.2 sec @ 94 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 134 mph

BRAKING
70-0 mph: @ impending lockup 180 ft

HANDLING
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.87 g
Understeer: minimal moderate excessive

FUEL ECONOMY
EPA city driving: 18 mpg
EPA highway driving: 26 mpg
C/D-observed: 19 mpg

INTERIOR SOUND LEVEL
Idle: 39 dBA
Full-throttle acceleration: 70 dBA
70-mph cruising: 67 dBA

 

Did Car and Driver use the G-Tech thingy?

 

I shall sell my RL today, never to drive again - thanks for the advice.

 

Anytime you need help with a decision let me know.

 

I have had the RL now for two weeks (loaner from stealership). I like all the bells and whistles and have had compliments about the cars styling but the it is especially slow off the line and in general somewhat sluggish.

Hope to get the Cl back before Labor Day.

 

versus

"Much slower?" "Sluggish"?

It's 1/2 second slower to the 1/4 mile than your CL, which is several hundred pounds lighter -- and the 1/4 mile times are stupid in the real world, since there's pretty much no place outside of a drag strip where you're going to floorboard the pedal to 100 MPH -- that is, unless you want to get arrested or killed. But I guess that's important to some people.

A much better figure is 0-60. And the RL's 6.7 0-60 time... hmm, the 0-60 times for the stock 2001 CL that I've found on the web are all 6.8 seconds. That would be 0.1 second slower than the RL, in my book.

*eyeroll*

I just don't understand what people want out of this car.....

 

Agree, it almost seems like people are going out of their way to find fault with it.

 

My previous car was an Acura CL Type S. So what if it can get to 60 mph 1/2 a second faster than the RL? Can a human being even perceive 0.5 seconds? What a person CAN perceive is having to fight the CL's steering wheel under heavy acceleration due to torque steer. That's the reason why I have a RL, not accelerations times. I've reached a point in my life where I think it is silly to have an engine as powerful as Honda/Acura uses sending power directly to the front wheels.

 

Actually, a 2001 CL-s is 0.1 second SLOWER than the RL to 60 mph.... and I submit that unless you're timing it, there's no way you'd notice the difference, even if it were a 1/2 second.

The 1/2 second is in the 1/4 mile, and I side with those who find that to be a completely irrelevant statistic.

Oh, and try comparing an RL from a standing start on wet pavement to a CL. 0-60, I imagine the RL will beat the CL by at least 2 car lengths.... if the guy in the CL can even keep it on the road....

 

Utilizing the Gtech to compare the CL and the RL in 0-60 I found the difference to be 6.3 to 6.8.

The half a second differential translates to a noticeable change in seat of the pants feeling in acceleration.

Sure the RL is a nice car and for the money you pay it should be.

I do feel though that the overall driving experience is hampered by the sluggish acceleration.

You can keep the bells and whistles I would rather have the CLs.

 

I had to sell my RL and give up driving when I stated that the 1/4 mile stsistic was useless. How did you get away with it unscathed?

 

Uhh.... I acknowledged that it might be important to "some people"?

Of course, most people I know who live by the 1/4 mile have mullets and wear t-shirts with beer ads on them. But that's a whole other issue.

 

The RL has some jump in the mid range. I usually am in usually in manual shift mode. when looking to pass i hit the pedal...I am in 3rd gear going about 50mph. The car flies all they way to 7000RPM and I get to 80mph very quickly. The auto trans is total joke. I find the paddles good enough and responsive.

 

you seem to be forgetting though that the 2nd gen is AWD and heavier. hence the car is slower despite the engine improvement. and yes, the RL is meant to be more of a luxury cruiser than a sports sedan.

SSTS

 

I sold my mullet with my camaro as a package deal. I threw in a Styx T-shirt just to sweeten the deal.

Since drag racing is "useless" to you folks, has anyone tried autocrossing? Seems to me, this SH-AWD should be a no brainer for the cones! Or is all racing useless? I have yet to see any Acura bigger than an RSX racing with me. Is everyone afraid to see what the Acura suspension engineers had in mind when they created our cars? Oh, and my best 1/4 mile time is 14.9@96 in my A/T 04 TL. Flame on boys! Maybe I didn't get rid of the mullet after all!

 

Having been the Comp Director of Region 105 some years back, I AM curious about the SH-AWD, BUT my Integra GSR is "reasonably modified" to play and I've had a shifter kart, 85 MR2, 84 RX7-GSL-SE that I used to dodge cones. I figure the weight to power ration of the RL is so bad that no amount of keeping the revs in the V-TEC power band is going to produce a car than keep up with anything in the BMW group, but fun is fun and so I say - go kill some cones

However, some advice a friend of mine gave (he and his wife own ClutchMasters, which has provide competion clutches for some of the fastest top 10 Hondas/Acuras on the circuit and sponsored one of their sons in IHRA for a couple years, so I heed their advice especialy about racing) - "Don't race anything that you can't afford to throw away at the end of the day." I've seen people bring out their everyday drivers and screw up the transmissions and engines so bad that they have to be towed home, like a Corvette that lost main bearings and transmissions that end up leaving much of their fluid along the track. I'm just an old fart stressing the idea that you "could" break a $45K car, but ignoring my advise sounds more fun!

Just curious since I can't find in classed in my 2006 Solo II rules, what DID they class it , something like STX?

 

Racing is fine, drag or otherwise. Run what ya brung, have a good time at the track.

But racing luxury cars is pretty silly... and while 1/4 mile times mean a lot at the drag strip, they're useless in the real world... as in, off the track. Outside of a strip, 0-100 times just have no meaning.

 

you telling me that racing an AMG is silly? thats a luxury car. i think your perception may be a bit too one dimensional. how is learning how to launch on street tires at the drag strip not going to help me at the stoplight? how is learning entries, apexes and exits on a track of cones not going to help me on the street? don't know about you, but i paid good money for my car because it offers me a fun drive on the street. learning how to maximise that fun is what racing does. otherwise, i could have saved alot of money and got a civic. food for thought or just infuriating your one dimension?

 

ABSOLUTELY! And for those who don't believe pufferfish, go to a high performance driving school, or take part in an autocross (yes, even with your RL). What you'll find is that the more time you spend learning to drive a car, any car, at it's limits, the better driver you become and the easier it is to handle the situations caused by other drivers who drive around clueless.

For those that don't see the benefit, you may never. But the idea of becoming a better driver and having more fun while you are doing it appeals to many. If testing the limits of you and your favorite transportation while paying $3.30 a gallon for gasoline isn't your thing then so be it, but those who like the extra rush of adrenanlin pumping through their veins shouldn't be chastised. BMW charges a hefty sum to attend their high performace school and classes are usually fully booked months before the class. Are the buyers of Acuras any less enthusiastic drivers than those that have BMWs? Not the Acura drivers I know.

 

There appear to be some serious reading comprehension problems around here....

Did I say any of that? No. You did.

Learning how to drive a car on the track will make you a better driver. No argument.

All I said was racing luxury cars is silly. I stand by that. And the RL, even with the riceboy "A-Spec" package, is a luxury car, there's no avoiding it.

I would also say that racing an AMG is silly, depending on what AMG you're talking about. An S55? That's stupid. While it's a sport-tuned car, I still think it's pretty stupid to put it on a track, unless you can afford to buy a new one when you break it and it's not covered by warranty or insurance.

How about an M55? Sure, race a Minivan... just because they threw an AMG badge on it, put some beefier tires and a body kit on it, that makes it a track car, right? Yeah. I think not.

The other thing I said is that OUTSIDE OF A TRACK, 1/4 mile times are irrelevant. it's not a performance statistic that has real world use, because there's NOWHERE that you're going to stand on the gas for 1/4 mile in real-world driving. If you do, you should be arrested. That comment was in response to people criticizing the RL earlier in this thread for having a 1/4 mile time that was .5 sec slower than some other car, and my point is, it's not a valid criticism in real-world driving.

Now go unbunch your panties.

 

If that's the case that should go across the board for you with any rode car then..
the first gen RL had ran in one lap america and did pretty well.

 

i am not sure where your rant is going, ackleg. you did actually say that racing luxury cars is silly and that's what i was defending. if you don't want to race yours, its fine with me, but don't call the rest of us silly for experiencing the limits of our luxury cars. your comment may have stifled someone who was considering it. no sanctioned racing is bad. its actually a plus. learning to drive at the limits and having an outlet for the daily driving aggression isn't a bad thing in ANY vehicle. some are less suitable for competition, but that doesn't make it silly to race the minivan...that takes balls! yes, there is a risk of damage, but you also take risks driving on the street. do you know why an S55 is $98 grand? because it has performance brakes, performance suspension and a monster performance engine and it does so with streetable manners. do these things make any sense on the street? absolutely not! these thing make the car stupid fast and a no time should that ever be realized on the street. its for the rich folk who enjoy posh leather while still taking the weekend to get an adrennaline rush in sanctioned racing. if price is your driver, than shall we hermetically seal up all the porshes, ferraris and vipers? does a corvette count as a car that is too expensive to race since they now get $60-70 grand for them?

as for the drag racing...yes, the thread was started because of the elapsed time, but to those who have drag raced before, there is so much more to a timeslip. the 60ft tells you how well the car gains traction from a stop. the 1/8mile verses 1/4mile tells you where your powerband is. your reaction time is a test of your own speed. the elapsed time is more of a bragging right, but it has its place. when i looked at buying my car, i looked at gas mileage, options, fit/finish and yes, 1/4 mile times. knowing i could put the hurt on the hemi 300C i was also considering, was a huge factor when coupled with doing so with 2 less cylinders, better gas mileage and ULEV status.

ahhhhh...panties fully unbunched!

 

15.2 @ 94 isnt that bad for a car like that, and Im sure capable of much more if anyone bothered to produce power mods for it.

 

Just curious, what track do you visit? I would think not one in SoCal because there are plenty of Acuras running that are bigger than RSX's (older Legend, CL, TSX, TL-S, etc) at the the SOLO, redline, or any of the Willow Springs events.

Do you run only 1/4 mile?

 

I am in Baltimore, so I go to Capitol Raceway for 1/4 mile, Summit Point for Road Racing (hence my avatar) and various stadium parking lots for Autocross. I do the DC region SCCA, Philly region SCCA and Autocrossers Inc. So, the answer is a big fat NO for only doing 1/4 mile. The dragstrip in an automatic TL which isn't getting parts thrown at it every month is actually quite dull once you've figured out how to launch.