VANDY

I worked for an Acura dealer in 1995 and my opinion is that they screwed up and lost their identity when they dropped the Legend name and then did it again by dropping the Integra name. Lexus has kept the same name with a different numerical designation for each redesign. The only car that wasn't affected by the name change was the TL from the Vigor which really never took off any way.
Bringing back the Legend name would be very good as long as they market it right, make it bigger and give it the driving characteristics that made it a great car in the first place.
They also need to stop being so damn conservative when it comes to the design!

SpicyMikey

I agree. Although I can't imagine why, maybe Honda is just happy with Acura being viewed as just a step up line for Honda. Kinda the "Buick" of Honda. If that's true, then I'm right there with you saying they cannot move into the $60k full size lux market.

I'll bet the next couple years will tell us where they want to go. They must realize now they are running out time. Korea is knocking on the door and wants into this party. GM is significantly improving their products every year and know how to market to American buyers with their Caddy brand. Lastly, this money exchange rate advantage which has favored Asia over Europe for the last 15 years can't last forever. If BMW and MB can have a level playing field they will kick some ass since there's already a favorable bias towards Eurpopean cars (at least here on the east coast). Whatever they decide, they better do it soon.

All this good intelligent discussion is making me hungry. I'm going to stop working (and chatting on this board) and go have a barbeque. Happy Memorial Day everyone.

jhr3uva90

Actually, dropping the Legend name and dropping the Integra altogether were decent ideas that were poorly executed. The names "Legend" and "Integra" emphasize the model of the car over the make (brand) of the car. There are people out there who still don't realize that the Legend was an Acura. By contrast, people might not know that the C230 is a mediocre car, but they do know it is a Mercedes. Also, Cadillac has been phasing out name for hard to remember letter combinations. The problem is that Acura got rid of those model names and then didn't build the overall Acura brand. What does a layman (non-car person) think when he hears the word, "Acura?" Probably not much of anything. That's because Acura never defined itself as a brand, at least in a way that differentiates itself from the rest. Lexus, on the other hand, always had arbitrary alphanumeric names for their models AND they emphasized the Lexus name. That's why they have a car that not only shares a platform with the Camry, but resembles the Camry, but it outsells the TL. The GS has never won any kind of car comparison, yet it outsells the RL. They've never sold that many LS cars relative to its competition, but that's okay because it helps to build the Lexus brand.

Much as I would love for my RL to be called "Legend," I would much rather the name "Acura" to mean something other than "fancy Accords."

nguyendminh

I think Acura is trying to hard and differniate from Honda. Instead they need just to go out all out and make a luxury instead of cutting corners. Examples:

1) 1st generation legend - Had the power and luxury. Coupes had 6 speed stick and powered seat belt (a retractable arm that brings the seat belt to the driver).
the. The dash and the doors are padded. Had power passenger seats.


2) 1st Generation TL's interior are padded, power passenger seat.

These older cars have 3 or four layers of paint. The new Acura only have two layers of paint, thinner more prone to scratch and does not have a deeps shine like other luxury makers.


Todays Acura:
RDX hard plastic, no power passenger seat.

A luxury car today that does not have power passenger seat and interior is hard plastic shouldn't be called a luxury car.


The Camry/Lexus es350 look very similar especially the back. No one ever complains about them being similar, yet both are selling like hotcakes.

CL6

Have you ever sat inside an X3?

nguyendminh

No, I haven't sat inside an X3. I take take the X3 is not selling well either.

CL6

18,000 X3s sold so far (almost as much as all of 06) seems okay to me. And the inside of it looks like a Fischer Price play set. And everything is 'extra' including leather, a CD changer, and a power passenger seat. There's a premium brand for you.

http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2...01/046220.html

SpicyMikey

So what's that tell us? P.T. Barnum was right. Marketing is 80% perception and only 20% reality. It'll never change because people will never change

Mike_TX

Okay, so I'm confused. Some of the membership spend half their time criticizing Acura for making everything standard equipment on the RL, then criticize BMW for making stuff optional and letting you choose what you want. Which way is it?

The X3, BTW, is BMW's entry level SAV, and as such can't really be called a luxury vehicle ... nor can it be compared in any sense to the RL. True, it's a "premium" brand's product, but being a BMW doesn't automatically make it a luxury vehicle.

.
.

SpicyMikey

Personally, I like choice. I can't imagine anyone who wouldn't. But, with more choice comes more complexity in manufacturing and distributing vehicles, and, in turn, adds more cost. I can live with the "all or nothing" manufacturing model if it saves me significant money.

CL6

The X3 comes across as 'luxury' because it is a BMW. An X5, 3-Series, or 5-Series does not come standard with leather. Is that not considered a 'luxury' vehicle? The X3s I have seen have just horrible, cheap plastic interiors.

Buying a stripper model BMW gives wannabes the nameplate but lets the richer buy all the options. It has been a successful strategy for BMW, Mercedes, and Lexus. I think 'getting' people for stuff like a CD changer or forcing them to buy a $1,200 option package to get heated front seats is absurd but it does a few things.

Firstly, it forces buyers to think in terms of smaller numbers ($1,000 sound system not $45,000 car). Secondly it allows more people to afford a brand because there are so many different layers in each model. Thirdly it allows the sales people to sell the car for more money because they can switch to other models, features, makes it tougher to cross-shop with other dealers, etc. And, lastly, these brands support themselves better by offering great leases based on the cheapo model.

Just my

gavine

I was attracted to the RL as a used car because it had no options. If I found an RL in the color I wanted, it would already have everything so no worrying about the price being in line with the options portfolio.

I wound-up buying new but I think the "no options" strategy is nice and, as much as it hasn't, should increase resale value.

Had it no been for this, I may have never looked at the RL in the first place and subsequently not bought one.

The rest is history and I'm a very happy (and proud) 2006 RL owner......I mean driver...the bank still owns mine for another 5 years

TampaRLX-SH

Streamlining options reduces costs and hopefully produces better value. But then we run into the controvesy where a value minded approach conflicts with luxury specialization.

I personally, like the 'everything is included' approach, but admittingly it does have its limitations. If something was included in the RL I did not like, it might break the deal for the whole package.

One reason I did not get the CMBS was that is was bundled with PAX configuration. I know I did not want PAX, so I had to forgoe the CMBS and ACC. Fortunately the 06 RL met all my needs by adding in just the backup cam.

But fewer manufactuers are offering pick and chose options. They usually come bundled, and again with a feature I may hate....then there is those package costs!

acuralvr1

I like the RL strategy of selling cars that "are fully loaded". One of the things this does is allow the company to sell the car for less- Acuras have always been great values.

On the other hand if someone has no interest in navigation they can buy an RL for slightly more than a NAV TL sells for! That's an awesome price for the technophobic out there.

noobie

I like it too. It has an added benefit of making it easy to compare inventory on dealer's lots and shop price. However, I do agree with the drawbacks of having to buy a package to get things I want. Looking at an MDX and will probably get a fully loaded sport/ent. Will spend more than I want, but will get way more than an equivalent priced BMW or MB.

Mike_TX

My comment was largely rhetorical. I am one of those who liked the fact the RL (thru 2006,anyway) was fully loaded. It made the car instantly top-of-the-line and did away with complicated package options.

OTOH, it is probably useful for lower-line cars to have options available so the buyer can choose what he wants or can afford.

As for BMW and leather, it is indeed standard equipment on many models. The lower-level 5-series (528i for example) has leather as an option, but it is standard on the up-level 550i. Ditto for certain other model lines.

And as a side note, the "leatherette" in BMW cars is so convincingly cow-like that it is hard to distinguish from real leather. It has the same pebble grain texture, the same feel, and is durable as hell. For anyone wanting the leather "look", but no worries about spills, etc., it would actually be a good choice!

.
.

SpicyMikey

I can't believe they sell cars with a vinyl option.

Curious if anyone has any experience with the pleather BMW uses. I haven't had a car with vinyl since 1984. Maybe it's gotten better but my experience is it cracks and starts showing wear in 3 or 4 years.

CL6

BMW's Pleather is as good as Acura's Plood.

gcook

I prefer everything built in to the price. That is why I buy acura. yeah I got the cmbs/nav but that was my only option. I have built a bmw online with a sunroof and leather and sensible stereo and "floor mats". You get what I am saying. By the time I am done the car is like 60K or more. Maybe you can get a prebuilt package or make a good deal and negotiate the end price, but I shy away from them because of this. It is the reason I prefer acura. I feel for the price and what you get, it is the best value.

CL6

Not to offend, but this attitude is anathema to the luxury car buyer and why Acura is a 'working man's' luxury brand.

SpicyMikey

Not sure what "working man" means. Don't we all work?

I see it as more of a difference between those who are driven more by image then substance. Acura drivers tend to be consumers with a value equation that has a small "image" factor.

By the way, I had to look up "anathema". Does that make me a working man?

gcook

If the shoe fits...If i wasn't a "working man" then I'd be driving a bentley. I like this approach..sorry..I work hard, and this is the way I feel..

CL6

There are no Acura snobs (which I like), except maybe NSX owners, but they like to portray themselves as misunderstood connoisseurs who scoff at others thinking they drive the penultimate sports car.

If I sell Acuras for a living and I own an Acura... what does that make me?

The perception of Acura is why it's not a "true" luxury car company. There is a practicality to the brand that is charming but, as they market themselves as a premium brand, also a bit puzzling, too.

Lexus owners seem to cling to their brand as a form of identity which I find a bit sad so, overall, I still like Acura.

gcook

Hype is not reality and marketing is quasi-reality, so I go with what makes best sense to me, and Acura seems to be the best fit for my needs. What is true luxury, and not, is silly. Are the features on the car the same or better than the other car? Luxury is a monacre or a label. Does this car last as long, ride as well and smoothly and have as few issues as the other. It seems pretty materialistic and superficial. Othewise we'd be driving BMW's or Mercedes if we really cared about name over everything else.

TampaRLX-SH

Per the definition on answers.com......


lux·u·ry (lŭg'zhə-rē, lŭk'shə-)
n., pl. -ries.
1)Something inessential but conducive to pleasure and comfort.
2)Something expensive or hard to obtain.
3)Sumptuous living or surroundings: lives in luxury.
adj.
4)Providing luxury: a luxury car.

Well let's see...

1) I surely don't need my RL, but it offers pleasure & comfort.
2) Expensive is relative, hard to obtain,,,they are rare!
3) That describes the cabin to me!
4) id a=b, and b=c, then a=c. The RL is a luxury car!

Mike_TX

No offense to CL6, but I find it interesting he frequently repeats the theme that "true" luxury car buyers should be people who ask no questions, spare no expense, and just quietly fork over lots of money for things with no regard for value received.

Sure, there are some wealthy people like that, but most luxury buyers do a LOT of research on any product they buy (whether it be a Lexus, M-B, Porsche or whatever). After all, they didn't get to be wealthy by being reckless or stupid with their money. The psychiatrist in me tells me CL6 would just LIKE to run across lot of buyers who ask no questions, don't try to negotiate price, and just hand over bundles of cash.

Oh, and BTW ... while we're defining words, "penultimate" doesn't mean "the absolute best". In fact, it means "next to last".

.
.

CL6

I don't believe I've ever called "true" luxury car buyers to be laydowns. As far as a "true" luxury car buyer I think it is what could be considered the "intangibles" of the brand is what interests them (and maybe some tangibles of hearing an 'Oh' and an 'Ah' sometimes) and perhaps something which Acura does not currently have. And to be a true luxury brand there does have to be "value received" unless you are into S&M.

Thanks for the definition of penultimate, I have been using this word incorrectly for many years! Perhaps it is widely misused because of definitions like this:

Penultimate profit prospect (PPP)
The second-lowest-priced of the ten highest-yielding stocks in the Dow Jones Industrial Average that is said (by authors O'Higgins and Downes) to be the Dow stock with the best possibility of outperforming the average as a whole.

http://financial-dictionary.thefreed...rofit+prospect

TampaRLX-SH

Sales & Marketing!?

CL6.....check yer PMs.

CL6

It says I have 1 unread message but when I check I see nothing. A glitch?

On another note I spoke with a guy who bought an RL from me last year. The #1 reason he chose the RL? He said it was the best deal out there. True, but not how one builds the brand maybe.

TampaRLX-SH

He may have said 'best deal', but likely he was comparing higher end vehicles. Value consvious and luxury many not compliment each other, but they can coexist in the mind of the consumer.

I re-sent the message...it shows 'unconfirmed', but no trace of it in my sent folder. The message gods must be angry.

SpicyMikey

Right now the RL is in fact the best deal out there in the under $60k lux sedan. That's a pretty much an inarguable fact. It's also a fact that this will draw value driven buyers to it like moths on a light bulb. All that shouldn't diminish it's status, however, it does. I'm perfectly OK with that, because I'm one of those moths like CL6 is talking about .

In a strange way, being overpriced, IS a status symbol. Driving around in an overpriced car sends out a statement that "Hey, I have so much money I can willingly overpay for this and not care!". I personally don't pay much for image (I'll pay a little, but not much). I'm admitedly unusual but certainly not alone (certainly not on this board).

Wanna hear about a guy with no image bone (puts me to shame); my next door neighbor was president of a large corp in Pittsburgh for many years and retired a multi-multi-millionare. He still drives a Buick cause that's what he likes and that's what his coal miner dad drove. Lives in an upper middle class neighborhood but could easily afford to live in an obnoxious one. I asked him why he didn't live in Windermere or Heathrow? He said there were too many old people. He still goes golfing with Arnold Palmer and Dan Marino but he drives a Buick! Hey, I respect that. He quietly spends his money on his family while his friends drive around in Lexus' and MB's.

On the flip side, half the people driving around in over priced MB's are eating peanut butter sandwiches for lunch to afford the car payments or living in a house they can't afford to furnish. I kinda find that pathetic.

Sorry, I'm ranting. Haven't had my morning coffee yet. I'll stop now.

123456SPEED

"He still goes golfing with Arnold Palmer and Dan Marino but he drives a Buick!"


Hey, I see Tiger driving Buicks too, maybe that's also why he likes Buicks

SpicyMikey

[QUOTE=123456SPEEDHey, I see Tiger driving Buicks too, maybe that's also why he likes Buicks [/QUOTE]

Funny. Hey, he's golfed with Tiger too. Saw the photo on the wall in his office. Maybe it's the other way around. Maybe that's why Tiger drives a Buick!

Mike_TX

When you put it that way, I see what you're saying. You'd prefer that the overall Acura brand have more caché, as opposed to appealing to people on the basis of its being a 'good deal for the money'.

I can't disagree with that, except to say the true "value buyer" isn't typically going to be looking in the $50,000 category to begin with, and those lux buyers who do find the RL will consider it a diamond in the rough.

But therein lies the rub ... if Acura had that caché from the get-go, more lux buyers would be coming in and finding the RL. So it all comes back to the point made long ago that Honda/Acura just doesn't market the brand the way we'd like ...

.
.

SpicyMikey

But if they marketed it more/better, the cars image would rise. If the image rose, they would charge more. If they charged more, it wouldn't be any better deal then a Lexus. Would half of us still be here?

I personally would have paid another $5-$6k for this car and still felt good.

CL6

Acura has done itself a great disservice offering all this 'marketing support' on the RL and other models. I'm pleased everybody here could own a wonderful car at a great price, but it does hurt the brand. They started on the RL, MDX, and TL last year. Now, people are expecting it. Incentive money is always the sign of either a weak product, a lazy parent company, poor marketing, or all three. I'm getting tired of feeling like I work at Filene's Basement and new cars are 'distressed' merchandise. Despite this, Acura sales are down and where is the new product? I don't see much 'advance' going on.

I'm sorry to vent... maybe too much coffee?

neuronbob

+1

CL6, you are 1000% right on this. Honestly, the RL is worth MSRP but Acura totally shot itself in the foot. I HOPE they change their act for the 3GRL.

SpicyMikey

+2, like I said earlier, I would have paid MSRP and still felt I got a good deal based on the alernativies. They could have avoided incentives and probably been better off -- at least no worse off.

A quick view of current incentives seems to show the "lux" brands are not offering incentives except Acura (across the board), and Audi A3

http://consumerguideauto.howstuffwor...incentives.htm

CL6

Holy s**t! That website is scary. And what is the A3 but a rebadged Golf anyhow..?

Rebates and incentives work in the short term but you don't build a luxury brand by offering them. Interesting, however, that this site does not go into leases and how BMW and Mercedes and Audi are really offering incentives by buying down the Money Factor. Anywho...

Land Rover is in trouble, Jaguar is in trouble, and if Volvo can be considered 'luxury' they ain't doing so hot, either and all of 'em are offering incentives. I would not go so far as to say that Acura is in trouble but I will say that only completely re-designed products will save them (TL, TSX, possibly a future CL, and NSX).

Thanks for the post and, at the same time, you're breaking my heart!

SpicyMikey

Check out Saab! You want a 9-5? They're practically throwing money at you. Does that make you feel better