Better handler? RL w/aspec or TL Type S

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 01-23-2008, 09:42 PM
  #41  
Pro
 
kirbyflorida's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Sarasota Florida
Posts: 597
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I know it is not because RWD handles better, I believe it is the rules trying to keep cost down.
Others may have more info. F1 this year is taking traction control off, and has taken anti lock brakes off years ago for cost and racing issues. Nascar just goes in a banked circle, not really an issue. Indy cars had AWD one year (one car) and it killed the other cars, was outlawed the next year.
Old 01-24-2008, 08:05 PM
  #42  
Senior Moderator
 
plastikman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: West Coast
Posts: 1,340
Received 85 Likes on 37 Posts
I turned my RL in the night before last and was given a TL-S, after requesting it. I wanted to see how it drove, see how it handled, see how it compared to my car. I have to say I really like the exhaust of the type S and I like the punch you get when you floor it, but overall I prefer the RL. I do have the Aspec suspension and rims on my RL, so when I compare the two, I would have to say the RL handles better with the Aspec suspension then the TL does with its type S suspension. Both cars are great cars, but for my likings, I would say I would rather be in the RL, it just feels safer and I enjoy the way the it handles with the suspension.
Old 01-24-2008, 11:32 PM
  #43  
You'll Never Walk Alone
iTrader: (1)
 
iforyou's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Age: 37
Posts: 9,493
Received 835 Likes on 519 Posts
Short clip of TL-S driven by Keiichi Tsuchiya, pay close attention on the stance of the vehicle during cornering:
http://video.aol.com/video-detail/us...f-4/4289308937


How TL-S does against its RWD competitors:
https://acurazine.com/forums/showthread.php?t=156967

I don't have any videos/articles of the RL that show actual laptimes of the car, but I've heard nothing but praise for its handling thanks to the SH-AWD.
Old 01-25-2008, 07:15 AM
  #44  
Alpha Geek
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: M@$$hole
Age: 64
Posts: 1,212
Received 49 Likes on 38 Posts
Originally Posted by 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.
.
To quote MXC(anyone else watch this show?), "Well you're WRONG!!"

I am lucky enough to have an RDX(G/F's ride) and an RL in my garage, and have compared both many a time, and while the RDX may feel stiffer and like it handles better, it most certainly does not.

I have a little stretch of on ramp that I do my "testing" on...it's a high speed long ramp with a decreasing radius corner 1/2 way through it. Both vehicles negotiate it quickly, but the RL does it consistently about 5mph faster than the RDX.

Not definitive by any stretch, but a good example nonetheless.
Old 01-25-2008, 09:40 AM
  #45  
Pro
 
RL06tech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Age: 59
Posts: 706
Received 26 Likes on 23 Posts
Originally Posted by F.Rizzo
Why aren't F1/NASCAR/IRL cars AWD then?
Because torque vectoring is illegal in racing. Its believed to give an unfair advantage!
Old 01-25-2008, 09:59 AM
  #46  
Pro
 
RL06tech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Age: 59
Posts: 706
Received 26 Likes on 23 Posts
Originally Posted by 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.
You guys are correct. But you should read more closely! My posts ambigously states"up to", but if you read further it also says the MDX and RDX is not variable The difference in the diff is simple the RL has an additional clutch pack that in the front of the diff which provides the variable overdrive. The RL's system is really the snazzle. The problem is that most people never get even close to exploiting the RL's capabilities so they think the car is simply too soft. Once you learn to drive SHAWD appropriately you discover that the handling abilities are amazing particularly given the RL's less than sporty rubber and wheel size.
Believe or not, the RL will keep up with an s2000 on the a winding course without difficulty, notwithstanding that the s2000 is one of the best RWD sports cars in the market and comes equipped with racing tires. If the RL had more ponies, it would actually trounce the S2K in almost any race.
That IMO is the RL's biggest deficiency, although powerful for street use the engine is too weak for any real racing, thus it can't keep up in a straight line with its non-AWD competitors however it kills all its AWD competitors which are even slower and can't count on the SHAWD edge!
Old 01-25-2008, 12:50 PM
  #47  
Pro
 
kirbyflorida's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Sarasota Florida
Posts: 597
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by RL06tech
You guys are correct. But you should read more closely! My posts ambigously states"up to", but if you read further it also says the MDX and RDX is not variable The difference in the diff is simple the RL has an additional clutch pack that in the front of the diff which provides the variable overdrive. The RL's system is really the snazzle. The problem is that most people never get even close to exploiting the RL's capabilities so they think the car is simply too soft. Once you learn to drive SHAWD appropriately you discover that the handling abilities are amazing particularly given the RL's less than sporty rubber and wheel size.
Believe or not, the RL will keep up with an s2000 on the a winding course without difficulty, notwithstanding that the s2000 is one of the best RWD sports cars in the market and comes equipped with racing tires. If the RL had more ponies, it would actually trounce the S2K in almost any race.
That IMO is the RL's biggest deficiency, although powerful for street use the engine is too weak for any real racing, thus it can't keep up in a straight line with its non-AWD competitors however it kills all its AWD competitors which are even slower and can't count on the SHAWD edge!
Very well said and sooooo true.
Please keep in mind people an RL was never designed for racing, large, heavy luxo cars and not designed for racing. They can be gutted and converted but that is a whole different animal.
I had a S2000 and it is fun, imagine the s2000 with SH-AWD, OMG.
Old 01-25-2008, 01:16 PM
  #48  
2012 Cadillac CTS-V Coupe
 
GoHawks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Southeast Michigan
Posts: 2,196
Received 95 Likes on 66 Posts
Originally Posted by kirbyflorida
Very well said and sooooo true.
Please keep in mind people an RL was never designed for racing, large, heavy luxo cars and not designed for racing. They can be gutted and converted but that is a whole different animal.
I had a S2000 and it is fun, imagine the s2000 with SH-AWD, OMG.
Well if they ever put SH-AWD in that car, it better be an S3500, because no matter how good the little 2.0 four is, SH-AWD is going to drain it of much of it's power.
Old 01-25-2008, 01:55 PM
  #49  
Alpha Geek
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: M@$$hole
Age: 64
Posts: 1,212
Received 49 Likes on 38 Posts
Nice to hear there are others love the S2000 as much as I do....The only wrong with that car for me is I couldn't fit in it.
Old 01-25-2008, 05:37 PM
  #50  
Pro
 
RL06tech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Age: 59
Posts: 706
Received 26 Likes on 23 Posts
Originally Posted by lumpulus
Nice to hear there are others love the S2000 as much as I do....The only wrong with that car for me is I couldn't fit in it.
I have a neighbor that went bannanas about mine. He wouldnt fit either! Much to his wife's relief Thats one thing I love about it if feels like you are "wearing the car! I can't wait for spring!!!!!!!!!!
Old 01-26-2008, 08:13 PM
  #51  
Midnight Marauder
 
jwong77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 743
Received 56 Likes on 42 Posts
Originally Posted by GoHawks
Well if they ever put SH-AWD in that car, it better be an S3500, because no matter how good the little 2.0 four is, SH-AWD is going to drain it of much of it's power.
I hear this quite often that AWD systems will disappate some of the power. Is there a way for Honda to engineer around this problem? Like make the drivetrain more efficient, while still retaining the good characteristics of SHAWD?

Lol, I guess the answer is no, or else it would have been implemented in the current incarnation already, but what be interested to hear some thoughts on it.
Old 01-27-2008, 10:02 AM
  #52  
2012 Cadillac CTS-V Coupe
 
GoHawks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Southeast Michigan
Posts: 2,196
Received 95 Likes on 66 Posts
Originally Posted by jwong77
I hear this quite often that AWD systems will disappate some of the power. Is there a way for Honda to engineer around this problem? Like make the drivetrain more efficient, while still retaining the good characteristics of SHAWD?

Lol, I guess the answer is no, or else it would have been implemented in the current incarnation already, but what be interested to hear some thoughts on it.

It's just laws of physics. It's going to take more power to drive 4 wheels as opposed to two. The only way to get around it is to add more HP.

The Lamborghini Diablo VT and Murcielago (sp?) don't seem to have a problem with it. I think the Murcielago has something in excess of 600hp.

Extreme example, but you get my point. Assuming you can package the SH-AWD system in a car as small as the S2000, I'm sure you can maintain or increase the acceleration times if you increase the power.

Reminds me of an old musclecar saying, "There's no replacement for displacement".
Old 01-27-2008, 07:12 PM
  #53  
8th Gear
 
Spyderx01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Age: 63
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Like 23109VC also had a Prelude with the ATTS and it was a fantastic handling car. Would push a little with agressive courner entrance and the ATTS would pull the front around. The RL with Aspec also handles well, feels about the same and the same speed on entrance ramps. The bigest diffference is the weight the RL feels significantlly heaver and drives heaver. One can not through the car around as easy. Still an extremely fun car to drive. Corner entrance speed is a little more critical, especially when grip is reduced due to conditions.
Old 02-20-2008, 12:10 AM
  #54  
Trailingthrottleoversteer
 
F.Rizzo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 322
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
This is quite a good read:

http://forums.thecarlounge.net/zerothread?id=3177228

The RL is not even in the same league, but neither is the RDX which was included in the test.
Old 02-20-2008, 09:44 AM
  #55  
Pro
 
kirbyflorida's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Sarasota Florida
Posts: 597
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by F.Rizzo
This is quite a good read:

http://forums.thecarlounge.net/zerothread?id=3177228

The RL is not even in the same league, but neither is the RDX which was included in the test.
Race track and street are totally different comparisons, the RL A-Spec is a killer handling car, many cars will have this kind of AWD in the future, it IS that good.
Old 02-20-2008, 11:54 AM
  #56  
Senior Moderator
 
neuronbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Cleveland area, OH
Posts: 20,015
Received 4,613 Likes on 2,193 Posts
Interesting.

As I keep saying, the TL is the best-handling FWD car out there.

It would've been great if Acura's marketers had any sense and actually gave reviewers or pro drivers an RL with A-Spec suspension and wheels. Just imagine what they would say. Just imagine how we enthusiasts would welcome that.

Unfortunately, that simply makes too much sense for Acura to understand. Now it's too late. Apologies for the sour grapes....
Old 02-20-2008, 03:57 PM
  #57  
Advanced
 
sadlerau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Perth Australia
Age: 70
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The really sad thing is, I bet the RL A-spec would be quicker than the TL-S on that track.
Old 02-20-2008, 04:24 PM
  #58  
Trolling Canuckistan
 
black label's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: 100 Legends Way, Boston, MA 02114
Age: 50
Posts: 10,453
Received 811 Likes on 644 Posts
Originally Posted by GoHawks
Reminds me of an old musclecar saying, "There's no replacement for displacement".
Sure there is, it's turbocharging .
Old 02-20-2008, 05:34 PM
  #59  
Racer
 
geronimomoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Age: 57
Posts: 422
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by black label
Sure there is, it's turbocharging .
Or supercharging.. For most driving in the US/Canada, it's supercharging that helps more..
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Charles Bennett
2G CL (2001-2003)
6
01-28-2018 08:53 PM
rp_guy
Member Cars for Sale
9
07-16-2017 07:33 AM
mvidal6
ILX
12
11-14-2015 07:43 AM
justin.w13.walker
Car Parts for Sale
0
09-22-2015 02:21 PM



Quick Reply: Better handler? RL w/aspec or TL Type S



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:36 PM.