Considering RL versus other luxury sedans
12-27-2005, 08:09 PM
#1
5th Gear
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2005
Age: 66
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Considering RL versus other luxury sedans
I posted a very similar thread in the TL forum. I'm interested in hearing from the TL and RL fans.
After several months of research and testing some of the $50,000 range luxury sedans, I'm now wondering what they offer that the TL does not. I have not driven the new TL (plan to do that tomorrow), but I thought I would ask the "experts" on the TL and RL forum what you see as the pros and cons of the TL with Nav versus the RL and the following cars that I have been considering:
530xi
A6 quattro
E350 4matic
M35X
RL
Now, one obvious difference if that all the above cars are AWD. I live in DC and need to be able to get to work on those days when the roads are bad here (and DC drivers are the worst when it snows a few flakes). So, I've been limiting my search to AWD cars since the base for the cars listed above with the exception of the A6 is RWD, which would be a problem. I figure the TL might be good enough in the snow for DC, I've had FWD cars in the past and did OK.
The TL with Nav is about $35,000 before any negotiations, the RL without the Tech package is about $50,000 but can probably be had in DC for about $45,000-46,000 (06). A comparably equiped 530xi is about $59,000 and can probably be had for about $55,000 (I don't have time to do European Delivery, which would save another $4000). The E350 4matic is about the same as the BMW, but discounts are steeper and it can be had for about $52,000. The M would be about $52,000 and I'm not sure what they are going for here in the DC area (by the way, am I the only one who has driven the M35x that found it to have excessively loud engine exhaust noise?).
So, besides prestige, I'm trying to sort out what I get for the extra $$$$$. One feature of the RL that I'm really attracted to is the Nav traffic, that would be great in DC where the beltway can go from smooth sailing to a parking lot in the time it takes me to get off for 10 minutes and pick up my son from daycare. Beyond the Nav traffic and AWD, its a little hard for me to sort out what the extra $14,000 MSRP is buying on the RL versus the TL.
OK, I'll stop and sit back for responses. This is a legitimate inquiry from someone who has done a lot of homework and has driven each of the cars listed above at least twice, and in some cases 5 or 6 times in the past few months. FYI, I currently drive an 02 A4 quattro. It has been an OK car, but I have been very disappointed in the automatic transmission and overall performance of the engine transmission combo. Not sure if that is just a quirk of my car or typical of all Audi autos. The car seems to be programmed to quickly go to the highest possible gear for economy purposes and then is very relucatant to downshift when you need to accelerate. The engine does not have enough low end torque for this set up, which results in the need to dig into the throttle to get the car to downshift and then a lot of abrupt acceleration when it finally does (and, by the way the overall mileage is pretty poor). The transmission also makes loud clunking noises sometimes when it is downshifting to a lower gear when you have been coasting (no throttle) for a bit and then apply throttle to accelerate. The dealer has "looked" at it twice. Once when it was near new they told me it was "normal", just last week when the car was in for its last service before the warranty expired they said the problem was that the rear brakes were dragging and they replaced the rear brakes. Well, the brakes feel great, but the clunk is still there. Well, enough of the A4 problems, this is an Acura board, not an Audi board, but I thought it would provide some perspective of where I'm coming from.
John
After several months of research and testing some of the $50,000 range luxury sedans, I'm now wondering what they offer that the TL does not. I have not driven the new TL (plan to do that tomorrow), but I thought I would ask the "experts" on the TL and RL forum what you see as the pros and cons of the TL with Nav versus the RL and the following cars that I have been considering:
530xi
A6 quattro
E350 4matic
M35X
RL
Now, one obvious difference if that all the above cars are AWD. I live in DC and need to be able to get to work on those days when the roads are bad here (and DC drivers are the worst when it snows a few flakes). So, I've been limiting my search to AWD cars since the base for the cars listed above with the exception of the A6 is RWD, which would be a problem. I figure the TL might be good enough in the snow for DC, I've had FWD cars in the past and did OK.
The TL with Nav is about $35,000 before any negotiations, the RL without the Tech package is about $50,000 but can probably be had in DC for about $45,000-46,000 (06). A comparably equiped 530xi is about $59,000 and can probably be had for about $55,000 (I don't have time to do European Delivery, which would save another $4000). The E350 4matic is about the same as the BMW, but discounts are steeper and it can be had for about $52,000. The M would be about $52,000 and I'm not sure what they are going for here in the DC area (by the way, am I the only one who has driven the M35x that found it to have excessively loud engine exhaust noise?).
So, besides prestige, I'm trying to sort out what I get for the extra $$$$$. One feature of the RL that I'm really attracted to is the Nav traffic, that would be great in DC where the beltway can go from smooth sailing to a parking lot in the time it takes me to get off for 10 minutes and pick up my son from daycare. Beyond the Nav traffic and AWD, its a little hard for me to sort out what the extra $14,000 MSRP is buying on the RL versus the TL.
OK, I'll stop and sit back for responses. This is a legitimate inquiry from someone who has done a lot of homework and has driven each of the cars listed above at least twice, and in some cases 5 or 6 times in the past few months. FYI, I currently drive an 02 A4 quattro. It has been an OK car, but I have been very disappointed in the automatic transmission and overall performance of the engine transmission combo. Not sure if that is just a quirk of my car or typical of all Audi autos. The car seems to be programmed to quickly go to the highest possible gear for economy purposes and then is very relucatant to downshift when you need to accelerate. The engine does not have enough low end torque for this set up, which results in the need to dig into the throttle to get the car to downshift and then a lot of abrupt acceleration when it finally does (and, by the way the overall mileage is pretty poor). The transmission also makes loud clunking noises sometimes when it is downshifting to a lower gear when you have been coasting (no throttle) for a bit and then apply throttle to accelerate. The dealer has "looked" at it twice. Once when it was near new they told me it was "normal", just last week when the car was in for its last service before the warranty expired they said the problem was that the rear brakes were dragging and they replaced the rear brakes. Well, the brakes feel great, but the clunk is still there. Well, enough of the A4 problems, this is an Acura board, not an Audi board, but I thought it would provide some perspective of where I'm coming from.
John
12-27-2005, 08:21 PM
#2
Welcome John. I was just reading your thread in the TL forum also. I owned the TL for 6 months before it was totaled and then I purchased the RL.
You should probably look back through some of the older threads as they discuss the RL vs TL a lot, but I will give a few reasons why the RL is better than the TL.
(not in any particular order)
1. awd
2. materials and craftsmanship in the RL blows away the TL.
3. TL is faster and a more sporty car than the RL
4. Onstar
5. Better crash test ratings
6. Leather in RL is much better than the TL
7. Nav system is upgraded and more advanced
8. More quiet
9. Rear view cam option
10. Audio system is superior
11. Paddle shifters (although I only used them once or twice and then stopped)
There are a ton of reasons, but I think the biggest is the craftsmanship of the RL. It kills the TL.
You should probably look back through some of the older threads as they discuss the RL vs TL a lot, but I will give a few reasons why the RL is better than the TL.
(not in any particular order)
1. awd
2. materials and craftsmanship in the RL blows away the TL.
3. TL is faster and a more sporty car than the RL
4. Onstar
5. Better crash test ratings
6. Leather in RL is much better than the TL
7. Nav system is upgraded and more advanced
8. More quiet
9. Rear view cam option
10. Audio system is superior
11. Paddle shifters (although I only used them once or twice and then stopped)
There are a ton of reasons, but I think the biggest is the craftsmanship of the RL. It kills the TL.
12-27-2005, 08:52 PM
#3
5th Gear
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2005
Age: 66
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
VP911
Thanks for your thoughts. Any comment on why Consumer Reports gave the RL such a negative review (though they still recommend it as a very good car)? They loved the TL and gave it an overall score of 90 while they panned the RL and gave it an overall score of 76. I know they hate complex controls like the controller in the RL (they kill the BMW for the i-Drive), but other than that it was hard from their stats to see why they rated it so much lower than the other cars tested in that issue, particularly the M35x, which they gave an overall 97!!! I've driven both and preferred the RL.
The RL seems to have overall gotten good reviews outside CR. They were a ten best pick last year in Car and Driver, came in second in a luxury car comparo in Motor Trend and Car and Driver, and won an AWD luxury car comparo on Edmonds. So, it really puzzles me why CR panned it.
Also, why do you think the RL does not seem to be selling better than it is? When I first starting looking there were a fair number of 05 RLs on the dealer lots and they were giving first offer prices well below invoice (around $42,000) before any negotiation. I think the CR review and the deep discounts (oddly) are making me a little gunshy on the RL.
John
Thanks for your thoughts. Any comment on why Consumer Reports gave the RL such a negative review (though they still recommend it as a very good car)? They loved the TL and gave it an overall score of 90 while they panned the RL and gave it an overall score of 76. I know they hate complex controls like the controller in the RL (they kill the BMW for the i-Drive), but other than that it was hard from their stats to see why they rated it so much lower than the other cars tested in that issue, particularly the M35x, which they gave an overall 97!!! I've driven both and preferred the RL.
The RL seems to have overall gotten good reviews outside CR. They were a ten best pick last year in Car and Driver, came in second in a luxury car comparo in Motor Trend and Car and Driver, and won an AWD luxury car comparo on Edmonds. So, it really puzzles me why CR panned it.
Also, why do you think the RL does not seem to be selling better than it is? When I first starting looking there were a fair number of 05 RLs on the dealer lots and they were giving first offer prices well below invoice (around $42,000) before any negotiation. I think the CR review and the deep discounts (oddly) are making me a little gunshy on the RL.
John
12-27-2005, 08:56 PM
#4
It may be because of the original problems the RL had. There were a lot of TSBs for the 05' RL when it first came out. The 06' is virtually problem free from what I have heard so far. Even the late build 05' RLs were excellent.
IMO the RL isn't selling as well as they wanted because people just don't know about it. We have had several threads disucssing marketing recently, and it comes down to just that. People don't look at Acura and think luxury brand - they think BMW, Benz, Lexus for luxury. If Acura marketed themselves as a luxury brand and did a good job of it - the RL could sell for 47k all day long.
IMO the RL isn't selling as well as they wanted because people just don't know about it. We have had several threads disucssing marketing recently, and it comes down to just that. People don't look at Acura and think luxury brand - they think BMW, Benz, Lexus for luxury. If Acura marketed themselves as a luxury brand and did a good job of it - the RL could sell for 47k all day long.
12-27-2005, 09:17 PM
#5
Three Wheelin'
I think Consumer Reports gave the RL a "bad" review because their priority is on LOW PRICE. In CR's view, low price and value are the same thing. The TL does cost a lot let than the RL and if that is your priority, then the TL is an excellent choice for you. On the other hand, if technology is your priority (if that is where you get your value), then the RL is a prudent choice. There have been many posts comparing the RL and the TL, so I won't belabor the point here, except to say two words: torque steer.
If you live in the DC metro area then you are probably technologically focused. I'm sure you will appreciate certain features of the RL. For example, the RL's voice-recognition is VERY advanced, which is something that Consumer Reports did not bother to mention in their review. Also, the NavTraffic is very handy around the Beltway (as you know), but Consumer Reports doesn't seem to care about that either. However, they were very concerned about putting a baby's car seat into the back seat of the car.
As far as marketing, everybody knows that i believe Acura (which is strictly a marketing organization) is still learning how to market this type of car. They are getting better, though. I have seen more print ads in the past month alone than in the previous year combined. And I even seen ads on billboards in Manhattan during my recent visit. Now, if they could just work on product placement. . .
I test drove the BMW 530, the Lexus GS 300, and the Infiniti M. Although I was highly impressed with the Infiniti, I bought the RL. Nine months later, I still have no regrets.
One question: are you buying or leasing? That can make a BIG difference.
Please read through this forum. I think it can be very informative. Good luck.
If you live in the DC metro area then you are probably technologically focused. I'm sure you will appreciate certain features of the RL. For example, the RL's voice-recognition is VERY advanced, which is something that Consumer Reports did not bother to mention in their review. Also, the NavTraffic is very handy around the Beltway (as you know), but Consumer Reports doesn't seem to care about that either. However, they were very concerned about putting a baby's car seat into the back seat of the car.
As far as marketing, everybody knows that i believe Acura (which is strictly a marketing organization) is still learning how to market this type of car. They are getting better, though. I have seen more print ads in the past month alone than in the previous year combined. And I even seen ads on billboards in Manhattan during my recent visit. Now, if they could just work on product placement. . .
I test drove the BMW 530, the Lexus GS 300, and the Infiniti M. Although I was highly impressed with the Infiniti, I bought the RL. Nine months later, I still have no regrets.
One question: are you buying or leasing? That can make a BIG difference.
Please read through this forum. I think it can be very informative. Good luck.
12-27-2005, 09:53 PM
#6
Cruisin'
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Francisco
Age: 51
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by jkjjpc
530xi
A6 quattro
E350 4matic
M35X
RL
John,
I bought my '05 RL on 10/31/05. I drove and looked at many of these cars like a crazy squirrel looking for bad nuts in the forest before deciding on my RL.
Two months later, I truly have no major regrets. The only major one is in my head -- the name 'Acura' simply doesn't hold the same level of 'luxury' in my head as Mercedez or BMW. That said....
530xi: I already loved my 2000 528i Sport/Premium/Xenon/Steptronic with 76k miles on it, so I was ready to love another BMW. What a disappointment I had... the Nav system, thanks to iDrive, felt 'clunky' and poorly interfaced. The material fit and finish felt less than my 2000 MY 5-series, so I was very concerned about wear and finish over time. Compare the cockpit surfaces, materials, and layout between a 2000-2003MY 5-series and this new one -- and you'll be astonished with how many corners were cut to decrease material costs and make the car more production-line friendly.
Aside from the above, the 5-series did what I expected it to do: it drove like a BMW. But it didn't exceed it. Also, having already discovered how expensive BMWs get post warranty coverage, and not hearing anything great about reliability on this new 5-series, and knowing this is BMW's first time in implementing AWD in a modern 5-series, well... I knew that if this was the car I boght, it's real cost would mount in the few years to come. I also didn't like the idea of my kids getting ice cream/peanuts/leaves/gunk/junk/etc. on the leather in this BMW. Seemed like it would be harder to keep clean, etc. than my 2000 BMW.
A6 Quattro: Didn't drive. Have heard really wonderful, lovely things about long-term owner satisfaction, but did not like the pure techno (where's the wood?) cockpit layout nor the iDrive-mimicking MMC system.
E350 4Matic: I drove an E320 4Matic as well as an E320 CDi for kicks. Immediately loved the cockpit feel, the gauge and instrument readability, the use of the dash display to mirror the 'next turn' info from the nav system, and the 'luxury' of the brand. But: in my driving tests, I found I like to glance at the Nav display AND listen to the voice direction. The Mercedez screen is mounted nearly flush with the top of the shifter, making it more than a 'casual' glance down to scan the screen. Second, adding every option I wanted to add (pretty usual stuff like Nav, Handfree Phone, Parktronic Front + Rear, Rear sunshades, XM Radio, Heated Seats, Keyless Go, etc.) all added about 12k to the sticker -- which put it near the top of my price range. CR recent articles about 'plumetting quality at MBZ' and the 'Chrysler Crunch' hitting Mercedez in terms of production part quality made me seriously think if I was going to get myself stuck with 'another' vehicle of post-warranty high-price repairs. I also completely disliked the input method for addresses in MBZ's Nav for the E-Class -- the S-Class's input system is much better, but in a car beyond my means. As a result, I also worried about resale value / trade-in value in 5-7-10 years down the road, and if I'd get stung more than I wanted to be.
M35x -- I drove it, I liked it... but to be honest, didn't care for the higher priced car that looked like it came straight out of Import Tuner magazine. It was just too angular, etc. for me to seriously drive 10 years from now and not look like I'm driving something really dated. In 10 years, my son will be 13. Is THIS the car I pick him up at school in?
In the end, what really sold me on the RL was:
1. the complete sweep of features included as 'standard',
2. NavTraffic. Now that I have it, I almost don't know how I lived without it.
3. Bluetooth connectivity for my phone. Seriously, I think this is one of the best bluetooth handsfree systems ever included with a vehicle to date.
4. Unique position, very few Acuras RL's on the road, noce to feel different. (Because I am, dammit!)
5. Long term reliability of Acura's second only to Lexus, and even then, it's pretty close.
6. OnStar. Looking back at my purchase criteria, this wasn't very high on my list. Now that I have a car with OnStar, I hear and notice significantly more stories about friends-of-friends-of-friends, etc. who have had 'near misses' and terrible accidents where OnStar made a difference.
Good luck making your mind up, and if I can help further, PM me or reply here.
--Neil
12-27-2005, 10:23 PM
#7
Originally Posted by vp911
Welcome John. I was just reading your thread in the TL forum also. I owned the TL for 6 months before it was totaled and then I purchased the RL.
You should probably look back through some of the older threads as they discuss the RL vs TL a lot, but I will give a few reasons why the RL is better than the TL.
(not in any particular order)
1. awd
2. materials and craftsmanship in the RL blows away the TL.
3. TL is faster and a more sporty car than the RL
4. Onstar
5. Better crash test ratings
6. Leather in RL is much better than the TL
7. Nav system is upgraded and more advanced
8. More quiet
9. Rear view cam option
10. Audio system is superior
11. Paddle shifters (although I only used them once or twice and then stopped)
There are a ton of reasons, but I think the biggest is the craftsmanship of the RL. It kills the TL.
You should probably look back through some of the older threads as they discuss the RL vs TL a lot, but I will give a few reasons why the RL is better than the TL.
(not in any particular order)
1. awd
2. materials and craftsmanship in the RL blows away the TL.
3. TL is faster and a more sporty car than the RL
4. Onstar
5. Better crash test ratings
6. Leather in RL is much better than the TL
7. Nav system is upgraded and more advanced
8. More quiet
9. Rear view cam option
10. Audio system is superior
11. Paddle shifters (although I only used them once or twice and then stopped)
There are a ton of reasons, but I think the biggest is the craftsmanship of the RL. It kills the TL.
Trending Topics
12-28-2005, 12:02 AM
#8
Three Wheelin'
Well, it depends on personal preference and how you drive. Personally, I think Honda has "maxed out" out the FWD platform. The new TL simply has too much torque and hp for a FWD car. In fact, the previous CL Type S/TL Type S had a similar problem, to a lesser extent. My previous car was a CL Type S, and I decided that it would be my last FWD car. Unfortunately, every Honda sedan is FWD except for the one I eventually bought, the RL.
12-28-2005, 01:24 AM
#9
1st Gear
Join Date: Dec 2005
Age: 43
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey jhr3uva90 i currently own a 2001 cl type s and intend on purchasing an RL soon, anyways being that you came from a cl as well i was wondering how the transition was, performance wise and others thanks.
12-28-2005, 05:52 AM
#10
Racer
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Union City, TN
Age: 79
Posts: 410
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by jhr3uva90
Well, it depends on personal preference and how you drive. Personally, I think Honda has "maxed out" out the FWD platform. The new TL simply has too much torque and hp for a FWD car. In fact, the previous CL Type S/TL Type S had a similar problem, to a lesser extent. My previous car was a CL Type S, and I decided that it would be my last FWD car. Unfortunately, every Honda sedan is FWD except for the one I eventually bought, the RL.
12-28-2005, 06:04 AM
#11
Instructor
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Virginia Beach, VA
Age: 73
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
My dealership gave me a 2005 TL the two times I brought my RL for service. There is just no comparison. The cabin of the RL is MUCH quieter. Also the fit and finish of the interior is far superior in the RL. The TL did seem a tad bit faster, but the transmission shifts were not as smooth as the RLs and the TL lacked the paddle shifters that I have grown accustomed to.
If price is what is bothering you, buy a slightly used RL for the price of a new TL and never look back
If price is what is bothering you, buy a slightly used RL for the price of a new TL and never look back
12-28-2005, 10:04 AM
#12
Instructor
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Seattle
Posts: 138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's built in Japan also....that's a big plus from my experience. If you can find an
ASPEC suspension equipped car drive it back to back with the standard model. You will drive it home.
Steve W
'05 C. Silver ASPEC
ASPEC suspension equipped car drive it back to back with the standard model. You will drive it home.
Steve W
'05 C. Silver ASPEC
12-28-2005, 11:41 AM
#13
Advanced
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Michigan
Age: 67
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
530xi - Subjectively a bit homely, decent handling, cold/plasticky interior, snotty and condescending service personel, expensive to service, reliability issues
A6 quattro - A bit slow and overpriced, Beautiful interior finish, expensive to service, reliability issues
E350 4matic - Overpriced, Handling a bit Patrician, Beautiful interior finish, snotty and condescending service personel, expensive to service, reliability issues
M35X - Excellent handling, cheap/plasticky interior, resale will probably dissapoint
TL - Decent power but with Torque Steer, Interior appointments and build quality reflect $20K discount here, easy to service and pretty darn reliable, expect some noise and ratlles at this price point - my loaner whilst awaiting A-Spec wheels really made me happy I did not buy one of these (which really surprised me because that is the vehicle I originally intended to buy).
RL - Adequate power under most conditions and the ability to use it, excellent handling, exceptional attention to detail and materials/build quality, Superb interior finish, inexpensive to service, reliability issues hopefully restricted to 2005 models only, $599.00 lease option!!!
Have you considered the Lexus GS300AWD? Another nice vehicle. And you can see my numerous posts about the LEXUS SERVICE experience.
A6 quattro - A bit slow and overpriced, Beautiful interior finish, expensive to service, reliability issues
E350 4matic - Overpriced, Handling a bit Patrician, Beautiful interior finish, snotty and condescending service personel, expensive to service, reliability issues
M35X - Excellent handling, cheap/plasticky interior, resale will probably dissapoint
TL - Decent power but with Torque Steer, Interior appointments and build quality reflect $20K discount here, easy to service and pretty darn reliable, expect some noise and ratlles at this price point - my loaner whilst awaiting A-Spec wheels really made me happy I did not buy one of these (which really surprised me because that is the vehicle I originally intended to buy).
RL - Adequate power under most conditions and the ability to use it, excellent handling, exceptional attention to detail and materials/build quality, Superb interior finish, inexpensive to service, reliability issues hopefully restricted to 2005 models only, $599.00 lease option!!!
Have you considered the Lexus GS300AWD? Another nice vehicle. And you can see my numerous posts about the LEXUS SERVICE experience.
12-28-2005, 01:58 PM
#14
Advanced
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Michigan
Age: 67
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
530xi - Subjectively a bit homely, decent handling, cold/plasticky interior, snotty and condescending service personel, expensive to service, reliability issues
A6 quattro - A bit slow and overpriced, Beautiful interior finish, expensive to service, reliability issues
E350 4matic - Overpriced, Handling a bit Patrician, Beautiful interior finish, snotty and condescending service personel, expensive to service, reliability issues
M35X - Excellent handling, cheap/plasticky interior, resale will probably disappoint
TL - Decent power but with Torque Steer, Interior appointments and build quality reflect $20K discount here, easy to service and pretty darn reliable, expect some noise and ratlles at this price point - my loaner whilst awaiting A-Spec wheels really made me happy I did not buy one of these (which really surprised me because that is the vehicle I originally intended to buy).
RL - Adequate power under most conditions and the ability to use it, excellent handling, exceptional attention to detail and materials/build quality, Superb interior finish, inexpensive to service, reliability issues hopefully restricted to 2005 models only, $599.00 lease option!!!
Have you considered the Lexus GS300AWD? Another nice vehicle. And you can see my numerous posts about the LEXUS SERVICE experience.
A6 quattro - A bit slow and overpriced, Beautiful interior finish, expensive to service, reliability issues
E350 4matic - Overpriced, Handling a bit Patrician, Beautiful interior finish, snotty and condescending service personel, expensive to service, reliability issues
M35X - Excellent handling, cheap/plasticky interior, resale will probably disappoint
TL - Decent power but with Torque Steer, Interior appointments and build quality reflect $20K discount here, easy to service and pretty darn reliable, expect some noise and ratlles at this price point - my loaner whilst awaiting A-Spec wheels really made me happy I did not buy one of these (which really surprised me because that is the vehicle I originally intended to buy).
RL - Adequate power under most conditions and the ability to use it, excellent handling, exceptional attention to detail and materials/build quality, Superb interior finish, inexpensive to service, reliability issues hopefully restricted to 2005 models only, $599.00 lease option!!!
Have you considered the Lexus GS300AWD? Another nice vehicle. And you can see my numerous posts about the LEXUS SERVICE experience.
12-28-2005, 02:42 PM
#15
Instructor
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by jkjjpc
I would ask the "experts" on the TL and RL forum what you see as the pros and cons of the TL with Nav versus the RL and the following cars that I have been considering:
530xi
A6 quattro
E350 4matic
M35X
RL
The M would be about $52,000 and I'm not sure what they are going for here in the DC area (by the way, am I the only one who has driven the M35x that found it to have excessively loud engine exhaust noise?).
John
530xi
A6 quattro
E350 4matic
M35X
RL
The M would be about $52,000 and I'm not sure what they are going for here in the DC area (by the way, am I the only one who has driven the M35x that found it to have excessively loud engine exhaust noise?).
John
It is incredible, like you are waking up a monster ready to do your bidding at the request of your right foot! It makes you aware of it, & does the tasking very nicely, especially when you turn off the VDC (Vehicle Dynamic Control).
Every time I squeeze that pedal more than the law legally tolerates, the M's engine talks back to me saying, "OK, you woke me up....you ready for a little action eh?...Lets go for it!"
Absolutely nothing unpleasant about it, it is definitly not "excessively loud engine exhaust noise" as you put it! It more like the engine exhaust communicating to you to back up the talk & walk the walk!
Drive it again...you will see!
To me, it is what sport luxury is all about!
Another poster mentioned the style of the M & his embarrassment picking up his kid from school in it...hehe!
Yes, the styling is both baroque & a tad too masculine for individuals who feel that the need to make an outward visible statement with the car they drive.
M styling is indeed understated, it will not draw crowds and wont "wow" your awaiting child & friends and call out to them that you have arrived!
It saves the "wow" for the driving exhilaration it offers, along with its comfort & convenience. It will not make your child the most popular kid in school...but I am not so sure the RL will either!
12-28-2005, 04:32 PM
#16
Instructor
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Northern California
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by jblaze3.2cls
Hey jhr3uva90 i currently own a 2001 cl type s and intend on purchasing an RL soon, anyways being that you came from a cl as well i was wondering how the transition was, performance wise and others thanks.
Here are the differences:
The all-wheel-drive is a major difference. You will feel completely confident, even in terrible weather.
0 - 30 speed is faster in the CL. The RL is geared for a more gentle take off.
0 - 60 is about the same. Don't make the change for increased speed, even though the '06 RL is rated at 290 HP and the 2001 CL-S is rated at 260 HP. The RL weighs a lot more.
The interior is much higher quality, with real wood instead of plastic.
Although the interior specs look similar, there is more head room due to the higher angle of the windshield in the RL.
There is also more upper body room because the interior of the doors is curved.
Gas mileage has been poor on the RL. The CL-S gave me 26 MPG on the freeway. I have been averaging 19 MPG on 95% highway driving with the RL.
The standard features, NAV, Blue Tooth phone connection and keyless entry are all great improvements over the CL. I'm very surprised that the XM radio has been so much fun. No commercials and it's prepaid for the first year.
Hope that helps,
NorCalRL
12-28-2005, 05:57 PM
#17
Originally Posted by Motown2006RL
530xi - Subjectively a bit homely, decent handling, cold/plasticky interior, snotty and condescending service personel, expensive to service, reliability issues
A6 quattro - A bit slow and overpriced, Beautiful interior finish, expensive to service, reliability issues
E350 4matic - Overpriced, Handling a bit Patrician, Beautiful interior finish, snotty and condescending service personel, expensive to service, reliability issues
M35X - Excellent handling, cheap/plasticky interior, resale will probably dissapoint
TL - Decent power but with Torque Steer, Interior appointments and build quality reflect $20K discount here, easy to service and pretty darn reliable, expect some noise and ratlles at this price point - my loaner whilst awaiting A-Spec wheels really made me happy I did not buy one of these (which really surprised me because that is the vehicle I originally intended to buy).
RL - Adequate power under most conditions and the ability to use it, excellent handling, exceptional attention to detail and materials/build quality, Superb interior finish, inexpensive to service, reliability issues hopefully restricted to 2005 models only, $599.00 lease option!!!
Have you considered the Lexus GS300AWD? Another nice vehicle. And you can see my numerous posts about the LEXUS SERVICE experience.
A6 quattro - A bit slow and overpriced, Beautiful interior finish, expensive to service, reliability issues
E350 4matic - Overpriced, Handling a bit Patrician, Beautiful interior finish, snotty and condescending service personel, expensive to service, reliability issues
M35X - Excellent handling, cheap/plasticky interior, resale will probably dissapoint
TL - Decent power but with Torque Steer, Interior appointments and build quality reflect $20K discount here, easy to service and pretty darn reliable, expect some noise and ratlles at this price point - my loaner whilst awaiting A-Spec wheels really made me happy I did not buy one of these (which really surprised me because that is the vehicle I originally intended to buy).
RL - Adequate power under most conditions and the ability to use it, excellent handling, exceptional attention to detail and materials/build quality, Superb interior finish, inexpensive to service, reliability issues hopefully restricted to 2005 models only, $599.00 lease option!!!
Have you considered the Lexus GS300AWD? Another nice vehicle. And you can see my numerous posts about the LEXUS SERVICE experience.
I also felt the Infiniti M interior superior than the RL.
There was an abundance of cheap plastics in the RL cabin. The two silver columns on the center console, the plastic near the hinge on the center armrest and most offensive plastics are the door handles themselves.
12-28-2005, 09:04 PM
#18
Originally Posted by vp911
Welcome John. I was just reading your thread in the TL forum also. I owned the TL for 6 months before it was totaled and then I purchased the RL.
You should probably look back through some of the older threads as they discuss the RL vs TL a lot, but I will give a few reasons why the RL is better than the TL.
(not in any particular order)
1. awd
2. materials and craftsmanship in the RL blows away the TL.
3. TL is faster and a more sporty car than the RL
4. Onstar
5. Better crash test ratings
6. Leather in RL is much better than the TL
7. Nav system is upgraded and more advanced
8. More quiet
9. Rear view cam option
10. Audio system is superior
11. Paddle shifters (although I only used them once or twice and then stopped)
There are a ton of reasons, but I think the biggest is the craftsmanship of the RL. It kills the TL.
You should probably look back through some of the older threads as they discuss the RL vs TL a lot, but I will give a few reasons why the RL is better than the TL.
(not in any particular order)
1. awd
2. materials and craftsmanship in the RL blows away the TL.
3. TL is faster and a more sporty car than the RL
4. Onstar
5. Better crash test ratings
6. Leather in RL is much better than the TL
7. Nav system is upgraded and more advanced
8. More quiet
9. Rear view cam option
10. Audio system is superior
11. Paddle shifters (although I only used them once or twice and then stopped)
There are a ton of reasons, but I think the biggest is the craftsmanship of the RL. It kills the TL.
As the current owner of an M45, I won't even address the remarks about the "cheap and plasticky interior". Suffice to say that I've kept my M a lot longer than I kept my RL.
12-28-2005, 10:46 PM
#19
Pro
Join Date: May 2003
Location: California
Age: 38
Posts: 638
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Steve C
Another poster mentioned the style of the M & his embarrassment picking up his kid from school in it...hehe!
Yes, the styling is both baroque & a tad too masculine for individuals who feel that the need to make an outward visible statement with the car they drive.
M styling is indeed understated, it will not draw crowds and wont "wow" your awaiting child & friends and call out to them that you have arrived!
It saves the "wow" for the driving exhilaration it offers, along with its comfort & convenience. It will not make your child the most popular kid in school...but I am not so sure the RL will either!
12-28-2005, 11:00 PM
#20
Pro
Join Date: May 2003
Location: California
Age: 38
Posts: 638
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Motown2006RL
530xi - Subjectively a bit homely, decent handling, cold/plasticky interior, snotty and condescending service personel, expensive to service, reliability issues
A6 quattro - A bit slow and overpriced, Beautiful interior finish, expensive to service, reliability issues
E350 4matic - Overpriced, Handling a bit Patrician, Beautiful interior finish, snotty and condescending service personel, expensive to service, reliability issues
M35X - Excellent handling, cheap/plasticky interior, resale will probably dissapoint
TL - Decent power but with Torque Steer, Interior appointments and build quality reflect $20K discount here, easy to service and pretty darn reliable, expect some noise and ratlles at this price point - my loaner whilst awaiting A-Spec wheels really made me happy I did not buy one of these (which really surprised me because that is the vehicle I originally intended to buy).
RL - Adequate power under most conditions and the ability to use it, excellent handling, exceptional attention to detail and materials/build quality, Superb interior finish, inexpensive to service, reliability issues hopefully restricted to 2005 models only, $599.00 lease option!!!
Have you considered the Lexus GS300AWD? Another nice vehicle. And you can see my numerous posts about the LEXUS SERVICE experience.
A6 quattro - A bit slow and overpriced, Beautiful interior finish, expensive to service, reliability issues
E350 4matic - Overpriced, Handling a bit Patrician, Beautiful interior finish, snotty and condescending service personel, expensive to service, reliability issues
M35X - Excellent handling, cheap/plasticky interior, resale will probably dissapoint
TL - Decent power but with Torque Steer, Interior appointments and build quality reflect $20K discount here, easy to service and pretty darn reliable, expect some noise and ratlles at this price point - my loaner whilst awaiting A-Spec wheels really made me happy I did not buy one of these (which really surprised me because that is the vehicle I originally intended to buy).
RL - Adequate power under most conditions and the ability to use it, excellent handling, exceptional attention to detail and materials/build quality, Superb interior finish, inexpensive to service, reliability issues hopefully restricted to 2005 models only, $599.00 lease option!!!
Have you considered the Lexus GS300AWD? Another nice vehicle. And you can see my numerous posts about the LEXUS SERVICE experience.
12-29-2005, 09:24 AM
#21
Advanced
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Michigan
Age: 67
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 03TL-S
The M beat the lexus LS430 as best luxury sedan in consumer reports. The LS430 has dominated that position for years until the M was made. This says alot considering the article said that the M outscored all the full size premium luxury sedans. The M may have alot of plastics (like all cars) but they sure arent cheap. Oh and the M has one of the best resale values in its class
And Consumer Reports should stick to toaster ovens, something they actually know something about. Better than an LS? I own one of those...and I don't think so. Not for a moment. But apples and oranges on that one anyway.
12-29-2005, 10:25 AM
#22
Three Wheelin'
Most of the comments regarding the M's cheap looking interior are directed toward the M35's brutally fake looking wood trim. Your M45 doesn't suffer from this same affliction since it has a different interior trim.
Regarding noise levels, the RL is definitely quieter and smoother than the M as the RL shows its bias towards the "luxury" in sports luxury car whereas the M shows its bias towards the "sport" in sports luxury car.
Regarding Consumer Reports, their automotive testing is simplistic and reporting is seriously flawed. They usually put more emphasis on cup holders than interior decibel readings. With the RL, they completely ignored the world's best crash test ratings and instead chastise the RL for reliability issues that mostly relate to the XM radio and NavTraffic systems that had nothing to do with the actual car. They then gush over the M45 because of its V8 performance advantages and ignore the weaker crash test results, 3 mpg poorer gas mileage and much noisier ride not to mention the fact that the M45, when loaded up,costs $10,000 more than the RL. I definitely agree with the "stick to toasters" comments.
Regarding noise levels, the RL is definitely quieter and smoother than the M as the RL shows its bias towards the "luxury" in sports luxury car whereas the M shows its bias towards the "sport" in sports luxury car.
Regarding Consumer Reports, their automotive testing is simplistic and reporting is seriously flawed. They usually put more emphasis on cup holders than interior decibel readings. With the RL, they completely ignored the world's best crash test ratings and instead chastise the RL for reliability issues that mostly relate to the XM radio and NavTraffic systems that had nothing to do with the actual car. They then gush over the M45 because of its V8 performance advantages and ignore the weaker crash test results, 3 mpg poorer gas mileage and much noisier ride not to mention the fact that the M45, when loaded up,costs $10,000 more than the RL. I definitely agree with the "stick to toasters" comments.
12-29-2005, 12:26 PM
#23
Advanced
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Michigan
Age: 67
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When you get into this class of car, it really is the details that count.
On the RL I really like the way the switches feel, the feel of the volume control, nav control, etc. So very, very nice. I honestly think the wood is a bit overdone, but again, at least it is unique. Like the way Honda uses the stiching for the door pulls as a design element that would normally be hidden to accent the craftsmanship. The mechanism for the dual-size cup holders. Even the way the trunk is finshed: With extra pads where materials meet, the pull down handle so you don't put fingerprints on the paint to close the trunk, the round hinges that slip inside the rubber tubes and seal, the chrome tied down hinges (and the optional trunk liner that has cut-outs for these). And the 5.1 audio system is second to none!
On the RL I really like the way the switches feel, the feel of the volume control, nav control, etc. So very, very nice. I honestly think the wood is a bit overdone, but again, at least it is unique. Like the way Honda uses the stiching for the door pulls as a design element that would normally be hidden to accent the craftsmanship. The mechanism for the dual-size cup holders. Even the way the trunk is finshed: With extra pads where materials meet, the pull down handle so you don't put fingerprints on the paint to close the trunk, the round hinges that slip inside the rubber tubes and seal, the chrome tied down hinges (and the optional trunk liner that has cut-outs for these). And the 5.1 audio system is second to none!
12-29-2005, 02:32 PM
#24
Pro
Join Date: May 2003
Location: California
Age: 38
Posts: 638
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You guys can talk all you want about how lovely the RL is but sales show all. The RL is nice, a big step from the old one, but i would never get one. Acura obviously hasnt convinced anyone with this RL. THe sales that acura seems to be getting are from highly discounted vehicles. You can get an RL for 41k or even less....pathetic for a new car imo. And even with these prices, it still sells very slow. My friend works at keyes acura and he said very rarely do people even look at the RL. They would rather have a TL because it looks better and is cheaper. If i was still biased toward acura, then id probably say the RL is the best out there, but having sat and driven in the cars it competes with, acura still has alot of work to do.
And how is the M a BMW wannabe? Design is totally different. If you mean it handles the same or better than a 5 series, then they are similar in that way. Yes, the RL has its own design....the front end looks like a second gen TL and it has a very generic honda look. And hey, my mom has an LS too and guess what, she was really impressed with the M...almost traded the LS in but instead she traded it for a CLS500 because she wanted a benz
Since you own an RL, or course you would favor it but dont bash a car that is obviously better to most people
And how is the M a BMW wannabe? Design is totally different. If you mean it handles the same or better than a 5 series, then they are similar in that way. Yes, the RL has its own design....the front end looks like a second gen TL and it has a very generic honda look. And hey, my mom has an LS too and guess what, she was really impressed with the M...almost traded the LS in but instead she traded it for a CLS500 because she wanted a benz
Since you own an RL, or course you would favor it but dont bash a car that is obviously better to most people
12-29-2005, 02:37 PM
#25
Pro
Join Date: May 2003
Location: California
Age: 38
Posts: 638
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by hondamore
Most of the comments regarding the M's cheap looking interior are directed toward the M35's brutally fake looking wood trim. Your M45 doesn't suffer from this same affliction since it has a different interior trim.
Regarding noise levels, the RL is definitely quieter and smoother than the M as the RL shows its bias towards the "luxury" in sports luxury car whereas the M shows its bias towards the "sport" in sports luxury car.
Regarding Consumer Reports, their automotive testing is simplistic and reporting is seriously flawed. They usually put more emphasis on cup holders than interior decibel readings. With the RL, they completely ignored the world's best crash test ratings and instead chastise the RL for reliability issues that mostly relate to the XM radio and NavTraffic systems that had nothing to do with the actual car. They then gush over the M45 because of its V8 performance advantages and ignore the weaker crash test results, 3 mpg poorer gas mileage and much noisier ride not to mention the fact that the M45, when loaded up,costs $10,000 more than the RL. I definitely agree with the "stick to toasters" comments.
Regarding noise levels, the RL is definitely quieter and smoother than the M as the RL shows its bias towards the "luxury" in sports luxury car whereas the M shows its bias towards the "sport" in sports luxury car.
Regarding Consumer Reports, their automotive testing is simplistic and reporting is seriously flawed. They usually put more emphasis on cup holders than interior decibel readings. With the RL, they completely ignored the world's best crash test ratings and instead chastise the RL for reliability issues that mostly relate to the XM radio and NavTraffic systems that had nothing to do with the actual car. They then gush over the M45 because of its V8 performance advantages and ignore the weaker crash test results, 3 mpg poorer gas mileage and much noisier ride not to mention the fact that the M45, when loaded up,costs $10,000 more than the RL. I definitely agree with the "stick to toasters" comments.
12-29-2005, 03:27 PM
#26
Advanced
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Michigan
Age: 67
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And how is the M a BMW wannabe? Design is totally different.
"I personally find the material quality in the RL interior superb. And, unlike the M, it isn't a BMW wannabe - it has its own unique design."
- I was talking about the design of the pseudo BMW IDrive dash.
"I personally find the material quality in the RL interior superb. And, unlike the M, it isn't a BMW wannabe - it has its own unique design."
- I was talking about the design of the pseudo BMW IDrive dash.
12-29-2005, 05:42 PM
#27
Originally Posted by Motown2006RL
Look, we know much of this is subjective. I personally find the material quality in the RL interior superb. And, unlike the M, it isn't a BMW wannabe - it has its own unique design. As far as resale value, Inifiniti in general ain't so hot. The M is a new model, since, to be fair, you can't really judge the previous stopgap Nissan Gloria model in this regard. Check out the actual residual value of the tons of G (or even Q series) models on eBay or Autotrader.
And Consumer Reports should stick to toaster ovens, something they actually know something about. Better than an LS? I own one of those...and I don't think so. Not for a moment. But apples and oranges on that one anyway.
And Consumer Reports should stick to toaster ovens, something they actually know something about. Better than an LS? I own one of those...and I don't think so. Not for a moment. But apples and oranges on that one anyway.
The G, M, FX have excellent residual value, near tops in class.
The Q was pre-Ghosn and sales are so bad on them, they're pratically giving them away - much like the RL
(in terms of discounts).Most of the RL uses quality materials, but would you like to comment on the parts I pointed out?
-door handles
-center console (2 silver painted columns by the HVAC/stereo controls)
-plastic by the hinge of the front/center armrests
Do you find these to be of high quality as well?
12-29-2005, 05:47 PM
#28
Originally Posted by hondamore
Most of the comments regarding the M's cheap looking interior are directed toward the M35's brutally fake looking wood trim. Your M45 doesn't suffer from this same affliction since it has a different interior trim.
Regarding noise levels, the RL is definitely quieter and smoother than the M as the RL shows its bias towards the "luxury" in sports luxury car whereas the M shows its bias towards the "sport" in sports luxury car.
Regarding Consumer Reports, their automotive testing is simplistic and reporting is seriously flawed. They usually put more emphasis on cup holders than interior decibel readings. With the RL, they completely ignored the world's best crash test ratings and instead chastise the RL for reliability issues that mostly relate to the XM radio and NavTraffic systems that had nothing to do with the actual car. They then gush over the M45 because of its V8 performance advantages and ignore the weaker crash test results, 3 mpg poorer gas mileage and much noisier ride not to mention the fact that the M45, when loaded up,costs $10,000 more than the RL. I definitely agree with the "stick to toasters" comments.
Regarding noise levels, the RL is definitely quieter and smoother than the M as the RL shows its bias towards the "luxury" in sports luxury car whereas the M shows its bias towards the "sport" in sports luxury car.
Regarding Consumer Reports, their automotive testing is simplistic and reporting is seriously flawed. They usually put more emphasis on cup holders than interior decibel readings. With the RL, they completely ignored the world's best crash test ratings and instead chastise the RL for reliability issues that mostly relate to the XM radio and NavTraffic systems that had nothing to do with the actual car. They then gush over the M45 because of its V8 performance advantages and ignore the weaker crash test results, 3 mpg poorer gas mileage and much noisier ride not to mention the fact that the M45, when loaded up,costs $10,000 more than the RL. I definitely agree with the "stick to toasters" comments.
Doesn't the RL have horrible gas mileage despite a much less powerful V6?
Mid-teens to low-20's isn't exactly very fuel efficient out of a V6.
And in response to the $10k price difference, its justified by a V8 plus all the options that aren't even available on an RL.
A comparably equipped M35x will be around the same price as the RL, if not slightly less.
12-29-2005, 06:04 PM
#29
I own a '05 RL and my wife has a '04 TL. TL vs. RL is no comparison. The TL is sporty and faster but I can't wait to get into my RL. The ride is smooooooth and I really enjoy the gadgets. Its a luxury car and my wife agrees...Its the ultimate road-trip car...
People can say the RL is not selling well, it looks like a Honda Accord, etc...
In the end, get the car that fits your needs. I've owned BMW's, Mercedes, Hondas & Acuras. My decision came down to Fit-n-Finish, Interior, Gadgets, V6, AWD and Price.
On another note, I work for a financial firm and have people in my parking lot who own some high-end German vehicles (E350's, S500's, 745i's and lots of brand new 530xi's) and several of them have stopped by to check out my Black Acura RL. They are very impressed at high quality interior, overall exterior fit-n-finish and high-tech gadgets in this car.
They also can't believe I can say XM Channel 80, Fan Speed Down, AC On, Display Traffic List and never touch a button. They always say, this is an Acura ?! Why didn't I hear about it.....I did, enough said.
People can say the RL is not selling well, it looks like a Honda Accord, etc...
In the end, get the car that fits your needs. I've owned BMW's, Mercedes, Hondas & Acuras. My decision came down to Fit-n-Finish, Interior, Gadgets, V6, AWD and Price.
On another note, I work for a financial firm and have people in my parking lot who own some high-end German vehicles (E350's, S500's, 745i's and lots of brand new 530xi's) and several of them have stopped by to check out my Black Acura RL. They are very impressed at high quality interior, overall exterior fit-n-finish and high-tech gadgets in this car.
They also can't believe I can say XM Channel 80, Fan Speed Down, AC On, Display Traffic List and never touch a button. They always say, this is an Acura ?! Why didn't I hear about it.....I did, enough said.
12-29-2005, 09:52 PM
#30
1st Gear
Join Date: Dec 2005
Age: 57
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyone have any issues with 'shoe room' meaning that when I test drove the RL I had trouble getting my foot from gas to brake. Admittedly I have clown feet (size 14) but am surprised at this. I am concerned for safety if I where to purchase. Thoughts?
12-30-2005, 08:32 AM
#31
Instructor
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Seattle
Posts: 138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For whatever it's worth...in my market, the dealers are selling every '06 RL they receive closer to MSRP...the supply for '06's is much leaner compared to the introduction '05 model year....this helps resale values in my territory also.
I've recently owned two recent Nissan products (Titan and 350Z) and the quality does not approach Honda's period!
Steve W
'05 C Silver ASPEC
I've recently owned two recent Nissan products (Titan and 350Z) and the quality does not approach Honda's period!
Steve W
'05 C Silver ASPEC
12-30-2005, 10:14 AM
#32
Advanced
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Michigan
Age: 67
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by psteng19
True, the older Infiniti's didn't have good residuals, but post-Ghosn era Nissan/Infiniti's do.
The G, M, FX have excellent residual value, near tops in class.
The Q was pre-Ghosn and sales are so bad on them, they're pratically giving them away - much like the RL (in terms of discounts).
Most of the RL uses quality materials, but would you like to comment on the parts I pointed out?
-door handles
-center console (2 silver painted columns by the HVAC/stereo controls)
-plastic by the hinge of the front/center armrests
Do you find these to be of high quality as well?
The G, M, FX have excellent residual value, near tops in class.
The Q was pre-Ghosn and sales are so bad on them, they're pratically giving them away - much like the RL
(in terms of discounts).Most of the RL uses quality materials, but would you like to comment on the parts I pointed out?
-door handles
-center console (2 silver painted columns by the HVAC/stereo controls)
-plastic by the hinge of the front/center armrests
Do you find these to be of high quality as well?
The TL is where they make their money by throwing an attractive body on an USA Accord chassis and adding some 'bling". They charge what the market will bare on a fully loaded Japanese-built Euro Accord (The TSX) but that doesn't leave them much margin. As Honda's technology showpiece and flagship, they don't intend to sell a ton of RL's (your argument that sales #'s determine the quality and ultimate value of a vehicle). So I guess the Chrysler 300 is the best car on the road, or maybe a Cobalt...
12-30-2005, 10:51 AM
#33
Advanced
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Michigan
Age: 67
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by psteng19
True, the older Infiniti's didn't have good residuals, but post-Ghosn era Nissan/Infiniti's do.
The G, M, FX have excellent residual value, near tops in class.
The Q was pre-Ghosn and sales are so bad on them, they're pratically giving them away - much like the RL (in terms of discounts).
Most of the RL uses quality materials, but would you like to comment on the parts I pointed out?
-door handles
-center console (2 silver painted columns by the HVAC/stereo controls)
-plastic by the hinge of the front/center armrests
Do you find these to be of high quality as well?
The G, M, FX have excellent residual value, near tops in class.
The Q was pre-Ghosn and sales are so bad on them, they're pratically giving them away - much like the RL
(in terms of discounts).Most of the RL uses quality materials, but would you like to comment on the parts I pointed out?
-door handles
-center console (2 silver painted columns by the HVAC/stereo controls)
-plastic by the hinge of the front/center armrests
Do you find these to be of high quality as well?
The TL is where they make their money by throwing an attractive body on an USA Accord chassis and adding some 'bling". They charge what the market will bear on a fully loaded Japanese-built Euro Accord (The TSX) but that doesn't leave them much margin. As Honda's technology showpiece and flagship, they don't intend to sell a ton of RL's (your argument that sales #'s determine the quality and ultimate value of a vehicle). So I guess the Chrysler 300 is the best car on the road, or maybe a Cobalt...
, eh?
12-30-2005, 11:45 AM
#35
Three Wheelin'
Originally Posted by Motown2006RL
Yes I do. You may not car for the color, but they are still quality items, as does Honda obviously. The RL is not "built-to-price" as the TL is, for example. No Carbon Fiber Driveshafts there! Or on the post-Ghosn M45 for that matter...http://www.vtec.net/articles/view-ar...icle_id=452729
The TL is where they make their money by throwing an attractive body on an USA Accord chassis and adding some 'bling". They charge what the market will bare on a fully loaded Japanese-built Euro Accord (The TSX) but that doesn't leave them much margin. As Honda's technology showpiece and flagship, they don't intend to sell a ton of RL's (your argument that sales #'s determine the quality and ultimate value of a vehicle). So I guess the Chrysler 300 is the best car on the road, or maybe a Cobalt...
The TL is where they make their money by throwing an attractive body on an USA Accord chassis and adding some 'bling". They charge what the market will bare on a fully loaded Japanese-built Euro Accord (The TSX) but that doesn't leave them much margin. As Honda's technology showpiece and flagship, they don't intend to sell a ton of RL's (your argument that sales #'s determine the quality and ultimate value of a vehicle). So I guess the Chrysler 300 is the best car on the road, or maybe a Cobalt...
Don't get me wrong: I really like the new TL. Just bear in mind that one of the major reasons why the TL costs so much less than the RL is because is is made on the same Ohio assembly line as the U.S. Accord using the same platform as the U.S. Accord coupe. The RL is also based on Honda's Global Midsize Platform, but is manufactured in Japan with higher production standards, IMHO.
Now, regarding the silver-colored plastic in the center console. . . yes, I wish they has used metal instead. I also wish they used less plastic near the gear shift. However, I think they are relatively minor gripes. Overall, I find the build quality and feel of the RL to be the closest to Lexus of any current Acura vehicle. Does Lexus driver out there agree with me?
12-30-2005, 12:08 PM
#36
Instructor
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Northern California
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 03TL-S
Its funny that you say the wood is what looks cheap. From reviews ive read from people and car mags, thats one of the M's assets. It actually does look real since it doesnt look like shiny plastic. THe m45 loaded is maybe 10k more because they offer many luxury options as lexus does and other luxury car makers
Case closed.
12-30-2005, 01:06 PM
#37
Originally Posted by Motown2006RL
Yes I do. You may not car for the color, but they are still quality items, as does Honda obviously. The RL is not "built-to-price" as the TL is, for example. No Carbon Fiber Driveshafts there! Or on the post-Ghosn M45 for that matter...http://www.vtec.net/articles/view-ar...icle_id=452729
12-30-2005, 02:41 PM
#38
Advanced
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Michigan
Age: 67
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Overall, I find the build quality and feel of the RL to be the closest to Lexus of any current Acura vehicle. Does Lexus driver out there agree with me?[/QUOTE]
Yes I do.
And sometimes I wonder why they didn't use the pearl black plastic used on the vent surrounds for those areas, including the parts the stitched door grips wrap around. That would give the wood a more cohesive appearance as well because there wouldn't be that sudden shift to silver. Then you would have just one color accent of "metal" - the bright silver in the interior instead of two.
Yes I do.
And sometimes I wonder why they didn't use the pearl black plastic used on the vent surrounds for those areas, including the parts the stitched door grips wrap around. That would give the wood a more cohesive appearance as well because there wouldn't be that sudden shift to silver. Then you would have just one color accent of "metal" - the bright silver in the interior instead of two.
12-30-2005, 05:14 PM
#39
Originally Posted by Motown2006RL
Yes I do. You may not car for the color, but they are still quality items, as does Honda obviously. The RL is not "built-to-price" as the TL is, for example. No Carbon Fiber Driveshafts there! Or on the post-Ghosn M45 for that matter...http://www.vtec.net/articles/view-ar...icle_id=452729
The TL is where they make their money by throwing an attractive body on an USA Accord chassis and adding some 'bling". They charge what the market will bare on a fully loaded Japanese-built Euro Accord (The TSX) but that doesn't leave them much margin. As Honda's technology showpiece and flagship, they don't intend to sell a ton of RL's (your argument that sales #'s determine the quality and ultimate value of a vehicle). So I guess the Chrysler 300 is the best car on the road, or maybe a Cobalt...
The TL is where they make their money by throwing an attractive body on an USA Accord chassis and adding some 'bling". They charge what the market will bare on a fully loaded Japanese-built Euro Accord (The TSX) but that doesn't leave them much margin. As Honda's technology showpiece and flagship, they don't intend to sell a ton of RL's (your argument that sales #'s determine the quality and ultimate value of a vehicle). So I guess the Chrysler 300 is the best car on the road, or maybe a Cobalt...
Cobalt is not in the same class as the RL and therefore sales numbers cannot be compared between the two.
I'll agree that sales numbers do not necessarily determine how good the car is.
A lot of times cars will sell more just because the dealer network is larger and reaches more consumers (i.e. GM, Ford, Toyota).
12-30-2005, 07:49 PM
#40
Three Wheelin'
Personally, I don't think the RL was meant to sell a whole lot of units. If that was the goal, then Honda would have made one with a manual transmission, one with an optional smaller engine, one with an option V8 engine, etc.
Basically, the new RL is selling substantially better than its predecessor. In addition, Honda makes more money per unit on the new RL than the old one because of the cost savings gained from basing the current car on the Global Midsize Platform.
Basically, the new RL is selling substantially better than its predecessor. In addition, Honda makes more money per unit on the new RL than the old one because of the cost savings gained from basing the current car on the Global Midsize Platform.