I have owned nothing but Acura cars since 1998. I have owned a 2005 Acura RL since March 2005. I've been on this board longer than I can remember. And please bear with me while I throw out some random thoughts about the RL/RLX.

1. I've enjoyed my RL immensely. I even drove it across country when I moved from Northern VA to Northern CA a few years ago. I have had no major problems with the car.

2. That being said, it is a shame the RL has been so unpopular. Many people on this forum have offered many theories over the years. Here is mine: when it comes to sedans over $45K (US dollars), it is ALL ABOUT THE BRAND. The average person driving this type car is probably leasing it, so s/he doesn't car that much about long-term maintenance costs. Also, chances are the person doesn't know a whole lot about cars. They just know brands, and they want the brand that tells the world (including other folks who don't know a lot about cars) that they can afford to drive a $45K+ car.

3. To the folks mentioned in point #2, Acura is just a second-tier brand, at best. I was pretty pleased with the deal I got on my RL. But when I told people how much I paid, many asked why I didn't just get a Mercedes or BMW for the money. It doesn't matter what kind of RL/RLX/Legend/GodSedan Acura develops, it won't be a huge seller.

4. Those same people see Lexus as the top of the second-tier brands. For example, the Lexus GS sells less than half the units in the USA that BMW and Mercedes sell.

5. Speaking of Lexus, their most popular models are FWD. In fact, one could argue that FWD vehicles gave Lexus a 10-year reign as America's #1 luxury brand. Why do I mention this? Because. . .

6. Because people keep bitching about Acura making FWD cars. Well, guess what? Most luxury car drivers don't know the difference between FWD and RWD. All they know is brand. I think that is why Acura has no RWD cars. You know another reason?

7. Because I think Acura serves 2 purposes for Honda: 1) Acura allows Honda to better utilize its existing production facilities, thereby enhancing their economy of scale. That means Acura's existence allows Honda to stretch out the costs of building cars over more models. 2) Acura allows Honda to test out new technologies on a smaller scale before implementing them on their more mainstream brand. In other words, I do NOT think Honda really wants Acura to become the next BMW or Mercedes.

8. By the way, how's the special RWD platform working out for Infiniti? I like Infiniti, especially the M. However, the G seems to be the only model that is really successful for them. And personally, I think the TL would sell just as well if Acura had not made the car so "over-designed." Speaking of design.

9. I think Honda/Acura learned their lesson with the TL and ZDX. It is better to have a "plain" looking car like the 2nd-generation TL and 2nd-generation RL than to be ridiculed. Personally, I think some people will complain regardless of how an Acura looks. There are some people who can never be pleased.

10. I like the new RLX. I know we don't have a lot of information on the car, but so far so good. I don't think it will have stellar sales, but it might just possibly my next car in a few years.

 

I agree with all your points. The RLX, as shown at the NY Auto Show, is likely the replacement for my 2006 RL, too. For me the RLX concept represents a steath wealth vehicle. As our country becomes more polarized regarding how wealth is viewed, for those of us who want a reliable luxury car with superior performance aspects (SH-AWD) but don't want to be screaming "wealthy", the RLX appears to be the ticket for understatedly giving off "great engineering/unique car value" vibes.

 

for the complainers and whiners...can't please them all.

interesting thoughts....honda's goal is to appeal to the masses(except the 4g tl and zdx, a little too far out there).

the new RLX has a maturity of that elder child status in the acura line up and it should with as the flagship of the brand. i like the overall look, albeit a touch boring for my tastes, but suiting for the "luxury" and "flagship" status. there is hope for the eventual TLX as the sportier rebellious middle child (we hope). the ILX gave us a glimmer of the plenum grill Acura has adopted in their design and it has been better integrated. only time and sales will tell if the masses will respond as they did with the TSX and the 3G TL.

another thought...just happened to see the lexus commercial just now with the theme of "luxury standard". they compare themselves to BMW, Audi, MB. Acura and Infiniti are nowhere to be found. even infiniti commercials don't compare themselves to Acura, the recent G commercial pits them against lexus, audi and bmw. granted i love the infiniti guy vs the bmw guy winter commercials.

it's like Acura got lost somewhere along the way. the reject kid that got picked last or not at all.

hopefully Acura has something to show in the new TLX...

 

All great points, including TLgirl's. I have yet to figure out why Acura is revered as the red-headed step-child. Ask anyone who has ever owned an Acura, and odds are you will get a rave review. I have heard horror stories about other brands - not necessarily Lexus or Infiniti, but the Germans in particular. In fact, the odds are good enough that the Acura owner will give a good review, I would put money on it because it's a safe bet. How can it be that the vast majority of Acura owners are in love with their car, but no one else can see it?

I suppose this reminds me of the old saying regarding my Alma Mater, "From the outside looking in, you can't understand it. From the inside looking out, you can't explain it."

 

Bought my 2005 RL in July 2005. Love this car. I've only got 61K miles on it, so there's a lot of life left. I am very enthusiastic about the new RLX, based on what I see, I fully expect it'll be my next car. Maybe after the first production year.

 

Great points all. Depending on price and final feature set, I think the RLX is close to the top for my next daily driver in a couple of years.

 

Why should Infiniti, a second-tier brand, compare itself to another second-tier brand? It is all about perception. That being said, I doubt BMW, Mercedes, or even Lexus drivers cross shop with Infiniti very often. That's too bad, though, I like Infiniti's cars.

 

funny thing is....Acura doesn't seem to compare themselves to other brands in their own commercials. they let the product speak for itself. and it some ways...i think Acura knows that.

the majority of non-car people will not have heard of an Acura. tell them what model you have and they'll stare at you blankly.

side story example: i had a client that just got rid of his Audi A8. he was tired of paying for the maintainance costs. he convinced his wife to go with a japanese brand. they looked at infiniti and lexus, but didn't consider an Acura until i mentioned it to him. he test drove the SHAWD TL (and had no idea what to expect from Acura's offerings having come from a history of Audi's). the lexus was blah to him and his wife (she wanted performance and handling). the infiniti M37x they liked. the TL...to their surprise was impressive. he would have been fine with either one. in the end they picked up a 2012 M37x loaded. WHY? the backseat and the trunk space were bigger (they road trip frequently and sometimes have the grandkids with them). it had nothing to do with looks or price even, but for them is was utility. i was happy to see they were impressed with the TL's offereings, but not the cargo or backseat space.

so while Acura is not a mainstream luxury brand, it can be IF they can put out a product that can play with the big boys. unfortunately, they shot themselves in the foot with the 4G TL over the last 5 yrs.

 

People who know Acura and don't get hung up on the brand and image are the ones who truly appreciate what they have to offer. Not sure what the average age is on this forum, but I remember when the brand first appeared and their tag line:

"Precision Crafted Performance"

They had an identity. Performance Luxury.

They then lost their way and tried competing with Lexus.

Does anyone remember when they briefly used the tagline, "Some things are worth the price"?

Ugh.

They struggled to find their way then and the cars became soft, with occasionaly hits.

They didn't like that people called their cars "Integras and Legends" as opposed to Acuras, so they went away from those names and went to alphanumeric designations.

Funny, if I tell people I own a 3 series, or an E series, most people will know what I'm talking about.

The Vigor became the 1st gen TL that to me was a bit boring, but the Integra was a hit for many years and it became the RSX.

They then got rid of the RSX because people objected to a $20K car on the same showroom floor as a near $50K car.

The 2nd gen TL was a hit when it came out in 1999. I remember walking into my dealer and they had waiting lists up on the wall with people waiting for as long as three months for whatever came from the factory.

The formula for that car was that it had a nice sporty look to it, good performance numbers for the time, and a ton of value. I loved the look from the day I saw it and declared it would be my next car. In 2001 I bought one, it was silky smooth and sporty at the same time, I enjoyed it a lot.

The 1st and 2nd gen Legends were hits because they were great looking cars, offered very good performance and offered a ton of value.

The first gen RL, while a nice looking car (and one of the first cars to offer an in-dash navigation at that price point) was never taken seriously mainly because it was trying to compete with the Lexus LS, and with a V6 and FWD, it couldn't.

The second gen RL was an attempt (in my opinion) to go back to the performance luxury roots, and for the first year or two it was very successful. The challenge was that Acura seemed to abandon the marketing for it. Stories go (many on these forums) is that Acura North America never really accepted the car because it was designed and built in Japan. Acura North America felt snubbed and as a result never supported the car.

While it may be more economical to build cars here now, I think it's naive to think that the financials were the only factor.

Just like the TL, I LOVED the car and declared it would be my next, but I was strongly considering the Lexus GS as well. In the end the RL won out because I felt it was sportier and the Lexus was a bit soft.

The 3rd gen TL was also a hit. Why? Because it stayed true to the performance luxury formula and it had a sporty look to it. My brother visited me yesterday and I got a chance to see his '06 TL again. The car has aged well and it still looks good on the road.

Then Acura again tried to find their identity again and tried to make a statement and they created the snaggle tooth. I think the TL would have been much more successful if they had launched it with the toned down nose that it has now. The car is a great performer, especially in SH-AWD mode and it's a tremendous value.

As mentioned in another thread, I read that Acura was trying to make a design statement and mimick Cadillac's "Arts & Sciences" design theme. The difference there is that Cadillac designed the whole car with that theme. Acura seemed to be content with grafting on a nose and butt that didn't flow with the rest of the car. Acura also CAN'T let platforms languish for 6 or more years before they update them. The 2nd gen RL came out in the fall of 2004 (2005 MY) and aside from the snaggle tooth, has not had any major updates.

Polarizing looks is not what attracts people to this market segment.

It does seem as though Acura is trying to find it's way back to it's performance oriented roots. The introduction of the NSX is a start. The original was widely lauded and it was a rolling test bed for technologies that trickled down to the lesser models. It also made exotics like Ferrari take notice that a car with exotic car performance could be produced for under $100K and it could have Honda Civic like reliability.

The paradox with the RLX is that it's a handsome car and while we all seem to want a design that was more daring. Daring is what got them into trouble with the snaggle tooth. Look at the BMWs, Audis, MBs and others. They are handsome designs. None of them can be considered daring. The difference is that those brands have established themselves. THey haven't spent the last 15 years or so trying to find themselves while at he same time confusing the public on who they want to be, while occasionally putting out a winner (almost despite themselves).

The RLX won't pull people into the showroom by itself. THe NSX is a good start. Also you need a good entry level car to draw people into the brand. Lexus has the IS and the ES (depending on whetgher you want luxury or sport), and the others do as well. Some might argue that BMWs best car (the 3 series) was their entry level car, but 1 series now has taken care of that.

Start offering the ILX with SH-AWD, and a turbo and I think you might get some excitement back to the brand. You can still offer your hybrid versions as well. Then as people evolve in their lives, they can move up to the other models.

In the end Acura lost me because like the 2nd gen TL, and the 2nd gen RL, I fell in immediate love with the Cadillac CTS Coupe. It just moved me. I struggled with leaving the brand after 19 years as I considered myself on of their most loyal customers.

I do hope they find they establish themselves again. If (probably when) I return, it will be because they put out a car that I will just love, just like my 1993 Vigor, my 2001 TL, and 2006 RL.

 

^^agreed. i'm holding out for hope. Acura's niche should be sport luxury. the RSX and the 3G TL reflected that. even the 2g RL did that when it came out with the SHAWD. i've always liked the look of that car. even the MDX has a muscular sporty look that other brands don't (well maybe BMW sort of, but audi does).

looking at today's consumers who tend to be a bit more active in their lifestyles...Acura can still offer the "best bang for your buck" and high reliability without the BMW/MB like prices.

 

Very well said, GoHawks.

Average age of AZine: 23-25.
Average age of RL forum posters: 35-40.

IMHO, the most offensive part of the TL is not the front, it's the back. They messed that trunk up beyond a loving mother's capabilities. I see one from the front and it catches my eye. When I get behind one, I just want to pass it.

The 3G TL may be the best looking car they have ever made, IMHO. I catch myself staring at them almost every day because they catch my eye better than any similar BMW, Audi, or Lexus. They had a winner there.

 

and I would push you higher on the average RL forum poster age. I'm 44 this year.

Again, well said, GoHawks.

 

Yeah, I thought about going higher than 40, but since 2Gs can be had for <$20k, there are some youngins among us.

(I picked mine up for $26k, but... )

 

I paid less than that

LoL, I'm not even in the RL posting range so that will pull you old timers back down in the average. You are welcome.

Plus having a CTS with a V behind it instantly shaves a few decades. haha

 

My ninja was regarding my age.

 

Ahhh, we will cut you in half and count the rings.