23109VC

an RL with the a spec suspension vs. a stock TL Type S

which would be more "fun" int eh twisties... which would handle freeway onramps / offramps better?

i've read the threads here where people praise how well the apsec setup improves the handling... but for those of you who have driven the TL Type S..it's stiffer and drives better than a base TL in terms of handling.

given the extra heft of the RL, does the aspec + SHAWD make it better than the TL-S or just equal?

gavine

Read this thread ->

https://acurazine.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4986

Not sure if the TL was a type-S or not but still interesting.

I never drove the TL-S but I would have to presume that the SH-AWD will make the RL better as long as you drive it the right way (feed power through the turns)

neuronbob

LOL!

That was a great thread, thanks for the reminder.

Indeed, the biggest difference between the FWD TL and SH-AWD in the RL is that the driving style in the curves is totally different. If you put your accelerator on too early in the TL, you get prodigious understeer. If you DON'T use the accelerator in a turn in the RL, you get prodigious understeer, so it pays to keep your foot on the gas.

23109VC

i think i know what you mean neuronbob...

I have an MDX with SH_AWD and I used to have an old Prelude SH that had ATTS...which is very similar to SH-AWD except it was ONLY on the front end of the car. my old prelude was a great handling FWD car and when you went into twisties, and came into a turn fast, you WANTED to ACCELERATE in the turn to kick in the ATTS system. if you let OFF the gas, the car would corner WORSE and get less stable..but if you went FASTER it would coner BETTER b/c the ATTS system could work it's magic.

the SH-AWD is like the old prelude system only at all four corners..and I know with my MDX that if tend to go into the turn slightly slower than I really want to go, and then accelerate IN and THROUGHOUT the turn...giving the SH system the ability to put POWER down and help me through teh turn. if you go into a turn and just take your foot off the gas and coast in the turn, the SH system can't do anything and you lose all it's benefit.

so yes, you drive differently, and having owned cars with the SH system or the older ATTS system.... I know what you guys mean. you drive the car differently to exploit the system.

actual grip or skidpad numbers aside - do you think an RL with the aspec suspension will feel as sporty as the TL S? or does the extra weight,etc of the RL make it just feel less sporty and more like a luxury cruiser?

i've driven cadillacs and buicks - yuck...not MY cars...friends and/or family..and that's the LAST thing I want.

If teh RL w/aspec would drive like a TL Type S only with more luxury and a more refined look...but the same overall ability to corner, I may like it.

I like the upscale look of the RL. I like the sporty nature of the TL.

You know my DREAM car would be a frickin M5. four doors, upscale look and mega power. but that's just a *bit* out of my pricerange. I lookedat the older gen M5s, which would probably cost about as much as a used RL..but you'd have to buy an 02-03 model, and it would be off warranty and probably about to cost an arm and leg... anyway..

the RL is a very cool looking car. I'll have to test drive one...the only problem is that it will be next to impossible to find one with the aspec suspension ON it to test drive. and i may be nervous about buying the car and then just "assuming" that once the aspec is on it it will be "sporty" enough for me...

is the difference between NON-aspec and having a-spec "sort of" noticeable or is it like night/day difference??

neuronbob

It is night and day. Less body roll in the turns, even less than the already minimal squat on takeoff, much firmer ride without significant loss of ride quality. Even better with 18s on.

larrynimmo

I have never driven the A-spec...the std RL handles tight fast turns better than any vehicle I have ever driven by alot. You stay glued to the road (unless you hit a bump)

Chas2

You know, I might just have to break down and be the first one to put A-Spec suspension on a CMBS car.

fstshrk

I am guessing RL will outhandle the TL-S due to SH-AWD if you know to keep your foot on the gas. The feeling is similar to driving a Porsche 911. You never want to let your foot off the gas pedal in a turn (unless you want to exit it going backwards that is).

gavine

Actually, when you let-off of the gas in a turn, the SH-AWD transfers the engine braking to the inside rear wheel which also enhances cornering when not accelerating. It's not as noticeable as when you power through but it does help.

I like sporty handling cars and, although I would probably love the A-spec, I have to say that the stock suspension is fairly sporty for a luxury-type of car. It's definitely firm and NOT boaty at all. Have you driven the stock RL yet? If not, I think you'll be pleasantly surprised and then when you add the A-spec, it'll be that much better.

Treblig

Pretty tasty with 19's too

black label

Honestly, I think a RL without the a spec handles better than a TL-S. The TL is quicker, but I've taken some corners at speeds in a RL that I'm quite confident would end up in terminal understeer in a TL-S.

The TL feels sportier, but I'd still put my money on the RL through the twisties.

kirbyflorida

SH-AWD on the RL will go faster and safer in turns, without a doubt.
I predict that once you have SH-AWD and use it, you will find it hard to be without.

DrMooCow

The RL will handle better. You can't get that great of a handling from a FWD car such as the Tl. If you want a great handling car, try looking at cars that are RWD or AWD. i.e. BMW M, 3 series, 5 series, Subaru (All have great handling), Volvo S60r, Audi A4, A6. Other wise the RL is good enough. Personally if I want an awd sedan, I would get an Audi. Quattro is awesome. Hence I named only sedans since that's more apples to apples.

Honestly, I don't think the TL handles all that well. Good enough for a FWD car though!

And to the previous poster about used bmws, yeah stay away from them unless you get it with a certified warranty from bmw. I just sold my after the warranty expired.

neuronbob

Actually, I wouldn't bash the TL too much. The TL is the best-handling FWD car I've ever owned. I REALLY hope that SH-AWD doesn't put too much of a weight penalty on the 4G TL coming this year....if that's the case, it will be unstoppable in the near-luxury sport sedan market.

23109VC

I almost bought a TL-S, but the FWD platform just turned me off. It handled pretty well and cornered very flat IF you drove it at 7/10ths. if you pushed it harder, ran it to redline, or got on the gas too much in corners, you could fell it torque steer..and it was BAD torque steer. like the steering wheel JERKED in your hand. on long sweepers, or mid-speed turns and corners, or gentle slaloming through modest twisties, it was a lot of fun. push it all the way and it was NO fun.

the RL, when pushed, seemed to hold the road better.

the TL did sort of feel sportier...but the RL probably handles better.

jhr3uva90

I really wish Acura would just make some RWD cars like everybody else! Basically, if it wasn't for the RL's SH-AWD, I wouldn't even have an Acura anymore. I got so tired of the torque steer in my CL Type S that I just didn't want to deal with it anymore.

F.Rizzo

Edmunds thinks differently:
http://www.edmunds.com/apps/vdpconta...5/pageNumber=1
But this was a 2005 test, and Audi might have made some improvements.

I think you should see if you can test drive an RDX, it handles markedly better than the RL - but there is a serious ride penalty in comparison. See if it is worth it to you to get better handling.
.

23109VC

the torque steer is really the ONLY thing that turnedme off to the TL. I really liked everything else about the TL and the TL-S... but the torque steer just does NOT belong on a car with that price tag.

the next gen TL should hopefully get SH-AWD, maybe a few more ponies, and hopefully, styling that is just as good or better than the 3rd gen...and then Acura will have another success.

kirbyflorida

On what basis do you think the RDX handles better than an RL???????

RL06tech

The RL, no question. The TL's handling limits with good summer rubber are great, the RL with the same tire combo almost defies physics.

RL06tech

Rizzo you're nuts
The RDX is pathetic yes it feels livelier than the RL because it has a washboard ride but is handling limits are lower than the RL by an order of magnitude. If you push the RDX it feels tippy (obviously) and the speeds you can coax out of the SHAWD a way lower than in the RL. The RL will run circles around the RDX. Furthermore though the RL SHAWD will over drive the outside wheel variably up to 5%, the MDX and RDX systems are not variable and "overdrive" only up to 1.7%. The reason for that limitation is simple the geometry of the SUVs will always work against them (much higher center of gravity). If you overdrive the RL it will simply oversteer (if done very agressively on the SUVs could get into much bigger problems if overdriven too agressively. In normal street driving most drivers would not get close to exploring those limits but if you let it all hang out on a curvy road or on a track you will quickly find out what I'm reffering to.

Chas2

Very interesting!

This is the first time I have read/heard why there is a difference in the implementation of the RL SH-AWD with the acceleration device, versus the SUV SH-AWDs which do not have that piece of hardware.

I will buy that explanation! I had speculated that the SUV SH-AWD may have been the version 2 of SH-AWD. Simpler, cheaper, and provides the same handling advantages, and that the RL was the first implementation, before they learned you did not need the acceleration device.

Chuck091279

I got an RDX as a loaner last Friday when my RL was having it's alignment done. So of course...I took it further past my house to some hilly spots where the roads can be quite winding. Having been there in my RL, the RDX was no match. The SH-AWD, although everpresent, didn't seem to really "kick-in" as much and steer the car around turns, like the RL's does. I took a turn at about 45 mph (nothing for the RL) and the RDX's wheels squeaked and I began to feel a loss of control.

Got the RL back and took the same turn at 50mph, and it was rock solid. It could've just been me being a bit nervous with the RDX: a) not my car, and b) SUV.

DrMooCow

I am not biased at all because I have owned European, American and Japanese cars. I just don't think Honda truly understands AWD yet. IMO, the BEST Japanese AWD car is Nissan. The technology behind the Skyline's AWD system is incredible.

I also agree that TL is the best handling FWD car I've ever owned. Truth is, there's not much more they can do to the car. I don't understand why people insists on modifying the hell out of their FWD cars. Any FWD that has more then 230 hp will give you torque steer.

I would much rather compare sedans to sedans. To the previous poster that mentioned the RDX, I am sure that car drives well. I've never driven one. But I can guarantee a Porsche Cayenne and a X5 4.8 will handle a lot better!

Like I said, the RL is a better handling car when compared to the TL. However, it's just not fair comparing an AWD car to a FWD car. When I purchased my TL earlier this month, I noticed the dealer I went to was selling the RL for $5400 off MSRP.
I personally would never buy a car that gives that much of a discount because it means they can't get rid of it and it just kills the resale value. Even looking at carsdirect right now, they are offering 5600 off the msrp on the RL with technology package.

GoHawks

I don't understand this comment. If your comparing resale off of MSRP, then yes you're going to take a hit, but then again you really aren't since you didn't really pay MSRP.

Based on what people have been getting on trades (Mike in specific), resale for the RL isn't all that bad when you consider what people REALLY paid for them.

The only people who are really getting screwed on the deal are those people who bought the very first RLs and did actually pay MSRP.

kirbyflorida

I agree completely.

black label

Are you sure that it can vary the overdriving of the outside wheel "up to 1.7%"? I was always under the impression (from taking the literature very literally) that the RDX/MDX SHAWD always accelerated 1.7% with no variability (i.e. it was 1.7% or nothing).

I know that when you put them up on the lift and actually look at the unit in the back, the RL is much larger and more complicated looking than what the RDX and MDX have.

Chas2

I agree with you, based on what I have read. The SUV rears are overdriven a constant 1.7% in comparison to the front. There is no variability, unlike the RL with its acceleration device, which can vary the speed the rear is overdriven.

F.Rizzo

Put the Kool-Aid down and try to be objective for a second. The RL weighs what - 2 tons + ? The RDX is light and nimble where the RL is heavy and ponderous (it's simple physics) and then compare the front seats. There is a reason the RDX has larger side bolsters in the front seats - it speaks volumes about the purpose of the car(s). I've never driven a TL-S except on a test drive, but I think it would handle better because it is lighter.
I drive over and back thru the Santa Monica mountains every day, and was born and raised on Mulholland dr ive. I beat my RDX like it was a rental and have never come close to any "bigger problems" other than the lack of grip when I back off the gas. It aint no Explorer.My comments are based on MY real world personal experience with both cars with on canyon roads. Other than quoting some sales brochure, where is your experience? As neat as some people think SH-AWD is, a nicely set up RWD is much better.

kirbyflorida

Sorry but you could not be more wrong.
SHAWD will be on more cars each year, it will out handle a RWD same set up EVERYDAY.
Have you seen the video about Sh-AWD and how it works? t is about 10 minutes , from Honda.
I have an NSX, second one, and the RL handles better and sure footed in city driving, and that is with all the weight and lesser tires.

larrynimmo

Yea that RDX is under 2 tons until you add gas to it...ooops. Look at the ground clearance and high center of gravity...to tell you the truth I have never driven the RDX, but I am willing to bet the RL will easily outhandle the RDX. look on Acura site and the RDX is less than 100 # lighter than the RL.

AWD beats RWD in handling. The RL's combination of high performance ride with near luxury car ride comfort is in a class of its own. Yes it costs less to make a vehicle with RWD and you can argue that AWD might not be a worthwhile option, and yet if your car has AWD standard and you are not paying extra for it, it won't hurt your performance except in weight.

jhr3uva90

Actually, it costs Honda less overall to bolt SH-AWD onto its FWD global mid-sized platform than to develop and manufacture a RWD platform. That's why Acura is making the transition to SH-AWD.

GoHawks

I agree with everything you said, but in fairness you need to put an asterisk on it. AWD will beat RWD everytime, but it comes at a cost.

Increased weight
Increased fuel consumption
Increased complexity
The need for increased power to keep up with an RWD counterpart (all other things being equal)

Some purists may argue that due to AWD's neutral driving dynamics it may be less fun to drive, but that's subjective.

kirbyflorida

I believe they are going to this system because it works better than anything else out there,not the cost saving as you say, it is a super system that others are trying to copy.
I will be very surprised if it is not on the next NSX.

jhr3uva90

Here is an article about how putting SH-AWD on a FWD system is cheaper than developing a new platform:

http://www.automobear.com/AcuraRLToo...nnovative.html

Also, SH-AWD might be the best AWD system, but from a marketing perspective Acura needs to start offering people RWD like every other luxury brand except Audi, which sells even worse than Acura.

GoHawks

Interesting article, and I can agree on it's assessment of the Vigor.

I owned a '93 and it was a pretty impressive handling FWD car. Partly because it came about as close as you can get to a 50/50 weight distribution. I can't remember exactly but it was somewhere around 55/45 or something like that. It had a hunkered down stance (kinda like our RL).

Biggest issue was that it had ZERO back seat space. it wasn't a big deal when I bought it as I was single at the time, but it did become painful towards the end of my eight year ownership of it as I then had kids when I traded it in for a '01 TL.

The 5 cylinder was quirky, but it was fun to drive. I still have fond memories of that car.

Chas2

While I do not doubt your driving experiences, and in fact, wish I had the same opportunities, FWIW, the weight difference is not that much...If the RDX weighed about 3500, like the 4WD CR-V, I would give you the light and nimble statement...

Base RDX 3924 Base RL 4014 DELTA 90
Tech RDX 3935 Tech RL 4018 DELTA 83

CMBS PAX RL 4076
Lightest TL 3623 Heaviest TL (Auto Type S) 3674

Chas2

jhr3uva90

That is a great article! I also find the note at the bottom regarding the night vision system very interesting. Over 30 degrees C, the system no longer works? And it costs >$5K?

I always thought Japan got hotter than that, but I guess maybe not enough to render the device ineffective for long periods of the year.

GoHawks

Let's see, this article was written in 2004, yet look at the following quotes.

It's almost eery as they just about predicted the areas Acura needed to focus on in order for it to be successful.

Now 3.5 years after the article was written, we have bemoaned ad nauseam where Acura has failed and it's in all the quotes mentioned above.

F.Rizzo

Why aren't F1/NASCAR/IRL cars AWD then?