mrdeeno

these newbs get worse and worse all the time.

I guess the "facts" that you are providing that Acura does not need a V8 is that the brand image is strong and RL sales are going through the roof, right?

As for the example of the Legend you brought up, consumers of TODAY don't live in the PAST. Other brands grow and change with the market. As the competition changes, so should the brand.

But of course, Acura should live in the past in the days of the "Legend". No wonder RL sales SUCK.

And please don't respond to me anymore, because you have nothing to offer this disucssion anymore but senseless arguments that have no use and shows how out of touch you are wtih the real world along...about as much as Acura is.

GoHawks

That would mean that they would have to create a RWD platform then to counter the other issue hanging over Acura's head. Lack of a RWD car.

SH-AWD addresses (temporarily) the criticism of Acura's FWD platforms.

wstr75

Speaking of adaptive transmissions, apparently the Toyota world has the same issue but on a far worse scale than Acura.

http://fourwheeldrift.wordpress.com/...ting-problems/

Interesting statement about Avalon/Camry/ES350 would have 4 mpg worse gas mileage with a reflash to make the transmission behave more responsively. Also interesting was the comment about cars not responding quickly when maximum power is applied. I guess our RLs have an adaptive transmission, too. Anyone experienced any issues like the Toyota's?

123456SPEED

Interesting read. I was at the dealer today to get a quote for ext warranty on my CLS 6MT and saw a red RL, best paint quality I've ever seen on a factory painted car, just stunning.
(and oh ... they had no time to talk to me about warranties, said to come back on a weekday!...so much for premium brand service, they didn't even offer any other options, there I was already in the building...)
Makes you feel unappreciated as a customer at the least. Do you think Lexus would tell me that?

Anyway, I'm an Acura buyer stuck in no coupe land and spend idle car time looking at the RL, chop 2 doors off and sport it up and they'd get another customer, (if they don't tell me to come back later!!).

I'm used to not liking the most popular brands, (Toyota, Lexus, Ipod, Bose), so it doesn't bother me that many buyers don't consider Acura or the RL, or the CLS.
Sorry I'm rambling. I think overall Acura is a very successful company. I don't need them to try to sell Lexuses, but many buyers probably do expect it.
(But they could have given me some customer service today!!!) They seemed to be selling a lot of cars today anyway.

dwboston

Yeah - I'm a noob. I've only been a member here for 3 years.

You're a useless troll. Seriously. Do you even own an RL? Moron.

jhr3uva90

As a former CL driver, I feel your pain. Personally, I hope they put a version of the upcoming Acura GT with a V6 engine that is comparable in price to the RL. That might bring back some CL and Legend coupe drivers.

Also, I feel your pain on the customer service issue. Acura dealerships are VERY inconsistent with their customer service. Auto manufacturers do not own the dealerships, so I don't know how much influence they can have, but I really think Acura corporate needs to get on the dealerships.

Mike_TX

I wonder ... Since it's already able to send, what, 70% of the torque to the rear wheels, there is already a rear diff and a driveshaft. I wonder how hard it would be (engineering-wise) to just dump the front diff and route all the torque to the rear? I'll bet not too hard.

In the process, they could delete both the front and rear clutch packs that send differing torque to the left and right, as well as the "brain" that controls it, and even the extra circuitry for the gauge display.

No, I'll bet it wouldn't be too tough to make the RL fully RWD.
.
.

dwboston

Isn't the SH-AWD in the upcoming NSX a rear-drive biased system? There's a press release somewhere from Honda talking about a rear-drive based SH-AWD system.

Mike_TX

That's interesting, but contradictory.

The writer complains about a hesitation problem with the 5spd AT in the Avalon, then goes on to say he believes some dealers are advising against buying Camrys because of this ... and Camrys have a 6spd AT, which is a different unit altogether. He tars both with the same brush, but that's a stretch for me.

And none of this has anything to do with a "flaring" problem, does it? I thought the flaring thing was kind of an overrevving between shifts that can slow down the shift engagement when the car is pushed kinda hard. My IS350 did that some.

Is this guy a crank who is PO'ed at Toyota?
.

.

jhr3uva90

From an engineering standpoint, it might not be that hard to make the RL RWD, but from a manufacturing standpoint and a cost standpoint it is easier and cheaper to bold AWD on a pre-existing FWD platform.

wstr75

Mike_TX, I followed the ES350 pretty close last as I almost bought an ES350. The transmission flare of the 6 speed automatic (Camry and ES350) and the shifting issues of the Avalon 5 speed tranny all relate back to the driver modeling software built into the car. The folks that have the problems appear to be the ones that only occassionally drive their car hard, acceleration-wise. The ones that do a fair bit of stop-light foot-to-the-floor acceleration don't seem to have the flare/control issue. This sounds similar to what DWBoston mentioned in his post earlier today. With your IS350, were you a driver that flogged the car on a regular basis or did you take it easy most of the time? How bad did your transmission skip a beat when you jumped on the throttle?

dwboston

The issue I've had recently occurs when merging onto the Mass Pike - I really step on it and the engine revs high but the car doesn't really accelerate - this must be the "flaring" you're talking about. It's not a big deal - it seems to happen more in the morning. I'd like to drive more aggressively on a consistent basis (so the transmission would stay aggressive with the shifts) but the traffic around here prevents it.

Mike_TX

What happened with my IS350 was that if I ran it up through the gears pretty hard, then backed off the throttle, it was like it went into neutral for a couple of seconds while the engine revved down. IOW, it didn't go ahead and shift on up, but paused in never-never land for actually about 2-3 full seconds before engaging the next gear. People told me this "rev-down" is what they are calling "flare" ... as if the engine is "flaring off" revs before going ahead and shifting.

It didn't do any other kind of pause that I noticed, and never hesitated on takeoff. In fact, it took off like a Nike missile.

I am not an overly-aggressive driver. I drive briskly, but seldom bury the throttle. But once in awhile, with a pocket rocket like the IS, you just HAVE to hammer it a little.
.
.

GoHawks

You would think.... but if you read the article below on the Auto blog, it almost seems as though Honda is obsessed with FED. THe article states that the S2000 replacement may end up being an Acura (should have been from the start IMHO), but the kicker is that they may end up switching back to FWD.



Here you have an established RWD platform, and now you're going to abandon it for FWD.


http://www.autoblog.com/2007/02/01/h...from-the-tree/

When we told you a while back that Honda was working on a possible four-seat replacement for the S2000, we were both right and wrong, we speculated that the new convertible could be positioned as an Acura. Such rumors are gaining credence as the S2000 replacement isn't shaping up to be much like the S2000 at all.

Emerging reports suggest that the new convertible could be badged as an Acura, which will likely mean it'll get a completely different name to fit into the premium brand's nomenclature – probably matching the "_SX" formula. (The brand issue is really only a consideration for the North American market – overseas Acuras are sold as Hondas, anyway.) It's also tipped to include four seats, whereas the S2000 is a strict two-seater. Rear drive remains a question mark, as the new convertible could shift to front-wheel-drive. Apparently a retractable hard-top is also being considered.

When all's said and done, a front-drive, four-seat, hard-top Acura doesn't sound like it would be much like the lightweight, rear-drive, two-seat, rag-top Honda at all. The S2000 was never a mass-market automobile, always consigned to the niche, but a luxury coupe-cabrio might be just what Acura needs to bolster its line-up. At that point, however, can you really call it an S2000 successor?


Right, in the sense that a design study is now on the way. Wrong, in giving it a Honda badge. We now hear it’s set to be an Acura.

If our sources in Japan are correct, Honda is moving well away from the hardcore, high revving uncompromising feel of the S2000, more towards the mainstream with the current proposal also fitted out with a retractable power hard top.

The rear-drive proposal is still at the ‘maybe’ stage, but we can definitely see a market for a more accommodating S2000 successor, especially with a bigger, better cabin.



.

mrdeeno

nice mature response. I'm still waiting for this "data" that you are using to support your position. At least I can give examples of correlations.

mrdeeno

and if i'm a troll...i'm at least an original troll (join date Jan. 2001) with 3000+ posts.

You can ask for "data", but you can't provide your own. I guess making personal attacks is the only way to defend your opinions. Good Job!

neuronbob

Calling mrdeenno a moron and a troll is improper decorum for this forum, dwboston. I understand that you and mrdeeno disasgree, but namecalling is not appropriate. Neither of you should bait one another.

Please stay on topic and leave the vitriol at home.

neuronbob

Way OT as concerns the RL, but I have to say.....

NOOOOOOOOOOOOO.......this is NOT what Acura needs. Keep the S2000 RWD, redesign the exterior, badge it an Acura. 2 doors is better than 4 here. Niche or no, this car could get people through the door at Acura dealerships.

Back on topic.....

What can Acura do for the current RL to bolster sales? Should the MMC have been a year early? (we are all expecting that 3.7 liter engine, and we should see it this fall if Acura does its typical 4th MY MMC for its cars)? Will better marketing really help? Or is it a dead horse we are beating because Acura won't commit more resources for the RL in the US?

NavyDoc333

Let me just say... I wouldn't care if Acura sold even 1 more RL. I love the fact that mine is the ONLY one parked in the hospital parking lot... that there is only one other in my town (I konw because I know the person and they are the reason I got mine) Now that's exclusivity.

IMO the only reason for people to want them to sell is so they can feel 'reaffirmed' in their decision to get one.

Read what Edmunds has to say about the 2007 RL.. PAY SPECIAL ATTENTION to the last line..

The overall design is outstanding, the quality of the leather used is exemplary and there's room enough for four full-sized adults (five in a pinch). The Bose sound system is so vivid it sounds like Frank Sinatra is singing while riding shotgun and Nelson Riddle and his orchestra are playing from the backseat. The ride is compliant and controlled, road noise is minimal and the all-wheel-drive system is effective. For luxury sedan buyers self-confident enough to never draw attention to themselves, the RL is a car that matches their personalities perfectly.

wstr75

Amen, NavyDoc! That last line is me, baby!

Mike_TX

Well, Doc, affirmation is probably the motive for a few, but I think most of us want the car to succeed for more practical reasons ... like resale value, parts availability, and so on.

Exclusivity is nice, but you could get that with a Yugo a few years back. And I don't think any of us would wish that on anyone we know and love.

A car is a sizeable financial outlay for most mortals, and like a stock, we watch it after buying to see how it fares in the market. Even if it's enjoyable to drive, it takes some of the fun out of it if you get toasted when it comes time to trade. I personally hedged my bet on the RL by leasing ... resale isn't anissue for me anymore.
.
.

geronimomoe

Sorry if somebody already said this but here goes... This car is in the sweet spot (or close to) of some top vehicle mfrs, MB E-class, Audi A6, and BMW 5-series. These 3 cars are very competent vehicles.. Yes, the RL is technologically up there, but for someone spending 40-50k, many want to be acknowledged for "making it"..

NavyDoc333

I agree Tex.. no one wants to take a bath on their resale... but I don't think there will ever come a day where I can't get a part for my RL.. .since after all it is a Honda Legend everywhere else in the world...and I don't see Honda deciding to stop production on power steering pumps..etc (at least not in the 5-10yrs I plan on owning my car).

Just because a lot of people don't own a 'new' RL... doesn't mean the market for them isn't MUCH broader when you try and sell a used car for thousands less. Not to mention that I got my RL for about 10K less than a comperably equiped GS. So you could say that Honda 'ate' the first 20% depreciation. (From 50K to the 42K I got it for) I'm willing to bet I'll do better on my resale than someone who paid

I bought a 94 GS300 w/ 37K in 1997 for $28,700..new it sold for 48,000. That's 20K in 3yrs. Not exactally holding it's value.

Let me give you a quick example from "Cars.com"..

2005 TL - had 26k mi's ... $29,000 (and they had listings for >1,500 TL's .. lots more model years though)

2005 RL - 26K mi's ... $41,900

My 06 only has 7k on it... and I paid 42,300. I'd say my resale is doing ok

You know Tex... I just read what I wrote and I sound like I'm being an ass... Don't take it that way, because I don't mean to be. Just debating.
I think those of us who have taken advantage of the manufacturer rebates will do great on resale.

NavyDoc333

I agree geronimomoe... that's why if I was going to have paid 49K for my RL, I would be driving a GS or the used BMW 545 I looked at. But for 42K.... it put the price range around that of the ES or TL or BMW 3... and in that segment the RL killed them. So I went with the smart buy for the $$.

dwboston

Leaving the vitriol at home.... Though I'd like to see some of that moderator finger-wagging directed at the guy who gets his kicks antagonizing people with a different opinion than him.

Still waiting for the data to back up your "90% probability" claim. And I don't recall making any assertions that need data to back them up. Just opinions as to why Honda/Acura may not want to invest hundreds of millions of $ in R&D for a V8 and the cars it would go into when they have better growth opportunities elsewhere in their business. All I have to back that up are an MBA and a CFA.

And you still haven't answered the question as to whether you even own an RL or not. Unless I'm remembering incorrectly you don't, which begs the question of why you hang around an internet forum antagonizing people who do. I'm sure every one of those 3,000 posts you're so proud of are pure gold in terms of contributing greater understanding to the AZ community.

dwboston

Here is the last-ditch effort to show you the fallacy of the argument you are making:

"Acura does not have a V8 engine. Other luxury brands do have a V8 engine. Other luxury brands are perceived as "better" than Acura. Therefore Acura needs a V8 to be better perceived."

There are myriad reasons why BMW, MB, Lexus, et al are perceived as having higher status or being more luxury-oriented than Acura. Dealership experience, customer service, marketing, social status association, vanity, etc. The having/lack of a V8 is just one small part of the puzzle. Focusing on that and making the unsubtantiated claim that it's a "90% probability" that it's the only reason is "shortsighted" and irrational. It's just your opinion. You were given examples of Acuras that sold well in the past and continue to even in the absence of a V8. No one is arguing that a V8 wouldn't be a good thing for the RL or another Acura flagship. The question is whether it makes economic sense for Acura to spend all of that $ given the state of the auto industry as a whole and the potential return on investment. They are probably better off spending less $ now to reposition the brand so the capital investment makes sense down the road. There are a lot of global geopolitical factors happening right now that argue against bigger, less fuel-efficient engines. It sounds great to say "Acura has to have a V8" but the decision doesn't occur in a vacuum.

AsianTL

Amen, Navydoc333,

I agree with you and do not care how many RL cars are sold.
Even the rear seats are small size for three american adults but it fits perfectly for my three Asian adults in the rear seats.

iforyou

iTrader: (1)

And that's some bad news for me as I would really like to own a 2nd gen RL, but it seems like $40k plus or minus is way out of my budget...as for the GS300, can't believe its value dropped so much in 3 years. In Canada, the car I drive, a 02 TL-S, it was sold for $41kCAD, and now, the resale value of a good condition with avg mileage is around $21kCAD. That's 20kCAD in 5 years.

Anyways, here are my 2 cents regarding this discussion:

1.) RL is a great car that is competitive with the best offerings from Europe as well as Japan thanks to its combination of features, quality, technologies, comfort, sportiness, and arguably, power and value.

2.) Why "arguably"?

Power - 290hp from a 3.5L V6 engine is pretty good when compared to other cars in this segment. 530i has 258hp, E350 has 272hp, A6 has 255hp, GS300 has 245hp, M35 has 280hp. In fact, as you can see, in terms of engine output, nothing beats the RL. However, due to the extra weight (100-200kg more), the RL cannot outperform all of its competitors in terms of acceleration. How to fix? Some possible solutions would be increasing the output of the current 3.5L engine to somewhere around 320hp. If that's a bit too tough, use the 3.7L engine from the MDX and upgrade it to suit the RL (320-330hp and 280lb/ft of torque may be?). I don't think it would be that hard since it's still a J series engine. I mean, if the TL can be upgraded from J32 to J35, I'm confident that the RL can go from J35 to J37. Another useful upgrade would be from 5AT to 6AT (or even more). More ratios would definitely help exploiting the potential of the V6 engine as well as increases fuel economy. Perhaps a J37 + 6AT combo could return the same mpg as J35 + 5AT but increases performance considerably.

3.) Yea, it sure would help sales number if RL offered a 2WD version. But I also think that SH-AWD is a great selling point, if it has the right advertisement. Like many have said, non-car enthusiasts don't appreciate or don't even know the SH-AWD and its benefits when it comes to enhancing handling. People definitely need to be informed. I'm sure the new MDX would be a great start since they are selling very well right now, and thus SH-AWD will be known to more people soon. But Honda needs to inform people how Sh-AWD helps a sedan, not just an SUV/CUV. I mean, most people know why (or think they do) SUVs need AWD, but most of them think it's unnecessary in sedans and that's why Honda needs to spend more effort in promoting it.

4.) Honda is sure a large company, but it's still far from the size of Toyota as well as Nissan. That's why it's reluctant to spend way too much resources on the luxury car market. I'm sure people in Honda know that it would be nice to have a car that can compete with 7 series, S-class, and some others. But that for sure, is not going to generate much profit (if any) for Honda. Honda, afterall, is a mainstream car manufacturer and that's very unlike Mercedes Benz, BMW, and Audi. These makers dedicate all of their effort into making luxury cars, and that's why they have the resources to make them, and the fact that they can share parts between models means they are all benefited from economies of scale. Toyota can afford to make that many luxury cars is because it's a much larger company. It can generate a lot of profit from its other mainstream cars such as camry, corolla, crown (from athlete, royal, majesta), Avensis, Allion, Premio.....and the list goes on (notice I have just mentioned some sedans only). Nissan is pretty much the same as Toyota, but with the help of Renault. Honda on the other hand, makes Accord, and Civic only.

Honda invested into the NSX because there was a missing link between its family sedans and its success in F1. NSX bridged that gap nicely. It shocked the world that the Japanese could make a car that can rival or even beat the best from Europe not just in objective categories, but also subjective categories such as steering feel, ride comfort, etc. Besides, the project was started when Soichiro Honda was still alive. It's said that if it wasn't for the death of Soichiro Honda, a 2nd gen NSX would've been introduced much earlier to compete with the "used to be new" F355 and 911. Also notice that the might Legend was borned when Soichiro Honda was still alive.

Anyways, this post is getting a bit too long, I guess I will end here.

mrdeeno

Someone doesn't understand logic

Acura needs a V8, among other thigns, to be better percieved. Acura STILL needs a V8 to be better percieved? How is that a fallacy? Show me a luxury brand with an image like MB, BMW, Lexus, Audi, that DOES NOT have a V8, and you will have proved my statement false. Until you do, there is no fallacy.

And no, I don't own an RL. So you are implying that NON-RL owners or NON-Acura owners on this site are "trolls" and not allowed to express their opinion on why they did not choose to buy an Acura or to discuss why the RL is not selling? Whether I own an Acura or not, whehter you enjoy your car or not, whether you can support your opinions or not (which, obviously, you cannot which is why you make personal attacks instead ), RL sales SUCK.

Let's see how many more of your buttons I can push.

As you can see, I'm not making any personal attacks...YOU are. Grow up.

dwboston

I never talked about RL sales, only what Acura may or may not do in response to current sales, which aren't great. Keep ignoring every other point that's made and focus on the V8 only, provide no support of any kind for your points, then change the argument and keep claiming I can't support my opinions, when I have. There's an old saying: "Foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds." Fits perfectly here. Good luck.

mrdeeno

like i said before...grow up.

Mike_TX

Point taken, Doc.

Only thing I'll challenge is the $41,900 resale for a 2005 RL with 29,000 miles. Given that most of us bought (or leased) our 2006 RL's for $40k or less, I totally doubt anyone could really get $41,900 for an '05. The realistic resale right now for that '05 RL is probably more like $31k.

Per Kelly Blue Book HERE the trade-in value (which is what most of us care about) is:

$33,350 for Excellent Condition (rare)
$31,500 for Good Condition (the best you can realistically hope for)
$28,305 for Fair Condition (what most dealers allow you)

With flagging sales, I expect those numbers to fall more quickly than, say, a Toyota Camry.

And while you're correct Legend parts should be available, your local dealer/mechanic isn't likely to stock them, so it may take a while for them to get here from Asia.

Me, I don't keep cars more than a year or two, so I ain't worried.
.
.

iforyou

iTrader: (1)

that's good news for me. If the resale value falls quickly, that means I can afford a RL sooner! But I thought trade-in values are always a lot lower than resale values, at least from my experience that's true. For instance, for my 1998 camry, the resale value is about $10000CAD, but the trade-in value is only $6k-$7kCAD.

NavyDoc333

While driving with my wife today.. I asked her what she thought about more people buying BMW's and MB instead of Acura's. (she's not a car person so I knew I would get an unbiased opinion)... Here's her answer...

"It's for the same reason we bought a $1500 St. Bernard. Pedigree! Sure he's going to have lousy hips... drool too much... and take S**T's the size of South America. But he's a pure breed. He has a heritage. You could go to the pound and get a dog for a $25 processing fee...and he would guard and protect and go on walks and be a good companion... but he wouldn't come with a heritage or greatness. Until people stop caring about things like that, they'll always pay more for it"

Oh and when I mentioned the lack of a V-8... she told me to watch Al Gore's movie on the environment again and stop being an idiot. Gotta love a woman like that.

neuronbob

mrdeeno and dwboston, read your PM.

Navydoc, I agree with you that we should concentrate on enjoying our cars, and that (honestly) I would have considered buying something else, in addition to considering the RL at $49k. Like you, I bought the car for $42k and I am about to pass over the 6k miles mark.

But Mike is also right in that people like me who purchased do have to consider resale. I have not traditionally been a person who spent ten years with a single car. I realize now that with this car, I may have to change that behavior so I don't take a bath financially. Luckily, the RL is a car worth keeping for over five years. We also don't know how well the RL will do in the used market in another five, we can only guess from the 2005s and 2006s that are already in the market.

static808

Like most of the people on this forum, we all did some comparison's against the mid-size luxury cars. What the RL provides and its price point ($42-$44K), if you got it at that price, you can't beat it.

I knew I would keep the car at least 5 years, so for me, I knew the resale might take a hit.

Besides, after 5 years, If I can get $15-$20K for my used RL, its worth it.

Mike_TX

You can get a dog for $25? Dang, I forked over $50 apiece for my cats.

Screwed again.
.
.

pimpin-tl

This is not true since I do read Toyotanation a great deal. The Flare issue has nothing to do with the software learning. It is a problem. Some had over 2000 miles on normal driving and got the flares.

It is a flaw in the transmissions, and Toyota has been trying to resolve it with no luck yet.

Mike_TX

WOW!

Sorry to contribute to off-topicality, but I googled "transmission flare" and see complaints about it in the following makes of cars:

Chrysler
Jeep
Saturn
Ford
Mercedes-Benz
BMW
Honda
Toyota
Lexus (and maybe even others)

In most cases, it appears it is the valve body that is at fault, and replacing it with a redesigned one fixes it. The original design was apparently intended to make the shifts smoother. Some people are installing some kind of kit (?) from someone called B&M that tightens up the shifts.

The notion it is being allowed to happen because fixing it will make fuel economy 3 or 4 mpg worse makes little sense ... flaring is unnecessary revving between shifts, and revving uses gas. Accordingly, eliminating this overrevving should actually improve gas mileage.
.
.

neuronbob

Please start a new thread in Car Talk for the Toyota flare stuff.