So i finally get to get rid of my saturn ls2(6 months might as well have been 10 years in that thing ) and Ive been back and forth a million times on what I want; wrangler, f150, gto, or a mustang(im sure there are more but im drawing a blank). But this summer ill be commuting to school 70 miles round trip two times a week, so the f150 is out. Northern indiana winters are kinda steering me away from the gto/mustang and the wrangler is not great for gas mileage either. This has lead to me to search around a little bit more, finding me looking at 05 rl's. I love the idea of having a high end car with technology, awd, and some performance. But I have some questions about that last part.. Will the 3.5 satisfy my want for power? Im not one to goose it all the time or be a dumba** but I still want a car thats got some go behind it. What kind of aftermarket things are popular to increase power in these cars? What are common things that go out around the 100k mark? Thanks for any advice and im sorry because you probably deal with like me all the time

 

With the exception of the GTO and Mustang (V8), the RL in my opinion would surpass anything you mentioned there. I'm assuming you're looking at used for the cars you mentioned that would be the case fince the GTO since it's not sold anymore.

I also differentiated the Mustang because if you're considering a V6 Mustang, I would say the RL would surpass that too. The Mustang is RWD and doesn't help you with your Northern IN winters concern. Also from a power perspective, speaking from experience I think the RL is comparable and actually better than the Mustang. Depending on the year Mustang you're looking at. I think in 2010/2011 was when Ford began putting a 300HP V6 in the Mustangs. Prior to that (2005-2009) the V6 in the Mustang was a 210 HP 4.0L V6.

I speak from experience. If you look at my signature, we have a 2006 Mustang V6 convertible that we bought as a summer car. Despite the somewhat unimpressive HP ratings, the car had torque ratings that are on par with the RL, and the Mustang is also a lighter than the RL. I think the 0-60 numbers for that car were around 6.8 seconds. The RL is around 6.6 (my source is zeroto60.com). Yes the RL's engine does have more HP, but as I said, the torque is comprable and the RL is also a much heavier car and it has to drive two more wheels.

Now you'll also see that I have modified our Mustang a bit. I put in a better flowing exhaust, a cold air intake and I also reflashed the ECU with a more aggressive tune. With that I think the Mustang had caught up to the RL and actually may have passed it, but not by much, but I never did a formal test.

Now having said all that, I love our Mustang for what it is, a convertible for the summer that is an iconic car that looks like the original from the 60s. That is it. If you're looking for an all around refined car it doesn't even come close to competing with the RL. After having the RL first, the Mustang would've been tiring as a daily driver.

The acceleration between the two may be deceiving. The RL has a gradual tip-in for smoother starts so you really have to punch it to get the engine going and get to the torque sweet spot. The Mustang has more of it's power on the low end of the RPM and it has quicker tip in so it gives the impression it's faster.

My personal opinion is that of the cars you mentioned, the RL would give you the best all around satisfaction. The AWD system in the RL is also underrated in my opinion. Most AWD systems are there primarily for bad weather and they tend to hurt performance. Acura's SH-AWD system actually enhances the performance and handling of the car. Push the car hard on an on-ramp and the car hunkers down and powers through. It had brought many a smile to my face.

Hope that helps. Good luck!

 

Well said

 

Thanks for the response! I have been looking at 05+ mustang gt's, If im gonna get a muscle car im gonna go V8 haha. But there is absolutely no back seat room in those cars.(A buddy just got a 05 and you have to stretch out before trying to crawl back in there!) Im sure id love a stang if i got it, but thinking about it and looking at them there just seems to be something underwhelming about them. Ive got some thinking to do, im down to a gt, rl, or a 08+ Saab 9-3 aero(2.8t ) I must do more research and figure out what kind of aftermarket these cars have as well as the aero.

 

You're looking at northern RL's. Ughhh, get under the car and look. Mine has rust everywhere and is going to take several weekends to fix, and just about any part that get's unbolted later will have to be replaced in time. The rotors look horrible, as do every bolt head and the struts and you name it, it's a mess. I will never buy another northern car. Would have not been so bad but it seems Acura has no idea what undercoating is. My freaking Ford had undercoating! So did my Mazda. What the F!

 

Ive been reading the thread on favorite things about rl's, you guys are making it hard not to want one of these cars! I just dont know, the 20 year old in me wants a mustang or a gto but this is the smarter decision..

 

The Mustang GT will be a fun car, but terrible in the winter. The interior, which is the same as mine, is doesn't hold a candle to the RL. Current Mustangs have come a long way, but early S197 platform had terribly cheap looking interiors.

 

Of what you have listed, RL and done. The biggest hit in value to an '05 has already happened, and RLs hold strong after going down to $20k. You would be getting a reliable car that you likely will never get to touch the limits of. Simply finding space to determine if you have a third gear VTEC hesitation, happens at ~80 mph (and yes I know I said third gear), can be difficult to do. I enjoy driving my car every day and yearn for opportunities to stretch it's legs. Do your homework on the 2005 quirks, and I guarantee you won't be disappointed.

 

As an outsider looking in, I find the performance of the RL to be very disappointing. I'm actually surprised Acura can compete in the ~50k range with this car, being that is has very mild styling and very little in regards to performance. I suppose their niche is the technology overload it gives you, but then again, I haven't really cross-shopped the RL and looked at what the competition offers.

I know some will disagree, and that's ok, we all have our opinions. I took home an '05 RL the other day without the saleswoman to see if it'd fit in my garage and whatnot. It was the first time I was able to really get on it, and let me say, I don't know if I will buy the car now. The interior was really nice, the ride is a little stiffer than I wanted, but the power just wasn't there. I suppose I shouldn't have expected much since it's only 300 hp in an AWD car that is quite heavy, but I was definitely a little surprised.

All in all, I would never pay ~50k for this car. Nowhere near that, even. For 11k or so that I can get it used, it seems pretty nice. I'm still unsure if the vanilla styling of it, and the lack of pep it has, will sway my decision to buy it or not.

 

Did you get on it? THe RL is deceiving a=with a long acclerator pedal travel. You have to push the pedal hard to wake the car up.

 

1) Very few people here paid $50 for their RL, and if they did, they got factory settings which leads to...
2) The ECU learns the driving style of the driver. Who do you think owned that RL before you took it home? Most likely a person older than 40. That car needs an ECU reset. I am not sure if you really understand the class that it is in b/c in 2005 the RL had the most power of any V6 in its class and the same or more than 2 V8s.

http://media.caranddriver.com/files/...rain-chart.pdf

Maybe you could point us to the powerhouse cars that you can get for $50k to help us out.

 

I think it's a fair assessment. He's not knocking the car to be a troll, he's just giving his opinion. Stock, the car does have conservative styling, but I think it's just aggressive enough. Definitely more aggressive looking than a Lexus ES or LS. I would not pay $50K either, but then I don't have $50K to spend. It does not feel fast to me either, but looking at the speedo shows me what I am not feeling. And my ECU is programmed for slow drivers and I drive slow most of the time and I don't think I'm going to worry about that. I just don't drive fast anymore. The car has enough power, and gets it to the ground better than anything I have ever driven. Getting under the car yesterday I can see where all the money is. A LOT of engineering under there that is not on the average car. What I cannot fathom is how some older people can buy this car at full price and not even realize what it has on it. My phonebook had no entries in it so the previous owner did not even program voice entries. They had their phones in there and I deleted those and they had their names and home addresses and everywhere they had been in the GPS memory. I want to call them and ask them why they neglected such a wonderful car! Just kidding of course.

 

I agree. Here is a video that has been posted e that gives a great underbody analysis

http://v11.lscache1.googlevideo.com/...260CBB&key=ck1

 

Well, first and foremost, I've heard of these ECU-relearns for years. I don't buy it, never will. I have a hard time believing the RL is power-limited because the person driving it wasn't flooring it often. I was told the same thing about my last car - I drove it very mildly for the first 2 months, and then when I started really using it, nothing changed. I reset the ECU in hopes of more power, but it didn't do anything. I wouldn't be surprised if throttle body mapping is ECU-dependent so that it might take more of a throttle tip-in to get it moving, but I don't believe the ECU is retarding power based on the driver. That would be pretty nonsensical.

Secondly, there is a lot more to a car's speed than raw bhp ratings of the motor. What does the RL dyno at? I'm sure the SH-AWD system zaps a good amount of juice before that power is put to the wheels. Also, pure conjecture here as I have no idea what the RL weighs, but I'm guessing its weight is pretty significant, upwards of 4k+ lbs. Add that all up and you have a car that runs (I'm assuming) pretty similar numbers to what my paltry 07 Civic SI runs at the strip.

Now, I realize this isn't a race car, and not everyone's priorities include a car that can zip around a 13 seconds 1/4 mile, but I'm just a little disappointed that Acura's flagship car probably barely out-edges my bottom of the barrel Civic in terms of performance. The posh interior does help make up for it over the cardboard box interior that the Civic offers me, though.

And like the other guy said, I'm not here to troll. I'm actually still considering the RL, but certainly not for its performance. In regards to your request, I could probably post up 10 cars off the top of my head that would crush the RL in terms of performance at less cost, but I'm sure you don't give a darn about a Subaru WRX posting up much faster times at half the cost, and I'm not sure why anyone would since they're vastly different cars for different audiences. As I said earlier, I haven't actually cross-shopped the RL, so I don't know what cars that are actually competing with it offer in regards to performance. Right off the top of my head, I know those twin turbo 3 series BMWs would walk circles around the RL, and I think they sticker in the 30s?

All in all, a nice car, but a bit underpowered. I think anyone who has actually driven a quick car and has gotten used to it will see that. Then again, a car I'm coming from has over 400 horsepower at the wheels with over a 1,000 lbs less weight than the RL, so perhaps I'm a little jaded

 

That video just scares me. So much to go wrong. Why did I listen to my wife and not just get the cute little Scion Xb I wanted?!?!?!? I am so glad I got an extended warranty. I wonder if I can renew it at the end of the three years. Just one repair of ANY of those systems would ground the car permanently as I would not put 5 or 6 thousand dollars into a repair of a tranny or motor. Even the driveshaft and exhaust would cost between 1 and 2 thousand. The transfer case, the diff with all those clutchpacks? Oh my God! It's an awesome car, I love it, but I think an extended-extended warranty is in my future.

 

I think I can chime in here. I own both - an 08 GT (my fun car) and an '05 RL (daily). Honestly, the Mustang is fun and in a whole other league (V8 rwd american "muscle"), but the RL is hands down a nicer car all around. There is no way in hell I would go back to daily driving my GT after having the RL. There are days when it's super nice out that I drive the RL over the GT just because of how much I like it.

I always thought the interiors of the new 05+ Mustangs were nice, especially after owning an '04 Cobra, but there is no comparison to the RL interior. Also, like you mentioned, there is zero room in the backseat of the Mustang and after a while, you'll get the lovely Ford rattles.

That said, it's really hard to compare the two cars. 2 door vs 4 door, RWD vs AWD, etc. It comes down to what suites your needs the best and what you will be happy with.

 

^ Yes, I agree with that. There was a point in my life (not very long ago ) that I wanted performance at all cost. Now I appreciate the creature-comforts cars like the RL have to offer over an all-out sports car or what have you

 

Seriously, with all due respect, between this post any your other thread, how do you leave the house in the morning? You could get hit by lightning, hit by a car, have a heart attack. So much can happen!

All kidding aside, any car can have issues, and the reason why Honda has been so successful is that transmissions don't usually fail, differentials don't fail. As a matter of fact, the current platform has been out since the fall of 2004 and I personally don't recall of any transmission or differential failures. I'm sure it has happened, but it's rare. You're worried about replacing a stainless steel exhaust? Come on!

If you're that paranoid you should buy a new car that is covered under a full warranty, or ride a bike, but then the chain might come off, or it might get stolen.

All kidding aside, you need to relax. The veterans on this forum know I don't usually call people out, but you are in a full blown panic attack.

You've bought a high end car, used or not, it has expensive parts and if you need to replace them, they could be expensive. If that's an issue, then you should have purchased a used Kia. The good thing is that it's a Honda/Acura, so the likelihood of a major failure is unlikely, but again, it's a 7 year old car.

 

You're right, I've just been panicked out by the corrosion on mine. My wife is about to hit me with a shovel! I would not have bought a car like this if it were not a Honda. Our 04 Pilot with 4wd has been trouble free for 114K miles except for motor mounts. Sorry guys, I'm just wired that way, it's a shame, I have not been able to enjoy the car that much yet because of it. OK, tomorrow, I'm not going to work on anything. I messed with it all day today. I'm just going to take a break and drive it. I'm not even going to visit this site tomorrow. I need a break! See you all Tuesday!

 

There is a guy on my civic forum with damn near 800k miles on his 06+ civic. He has replaced the transmission and motor one time each, but aside from that, essentially routine maintenance. The motor was only replaced due to him removing the original (still working fine at 350k) to fix the transmission, which literally only broke due to one very minor piece failing. Honda's are very, very solid!

 

I never said the ECU holds back power. It changes the throttle response.

The RL puts at least 207 hp on the ground. I say that because SH-AWD does not like to be dynoed. One member disengaged the drivehaft and front wheeled it to 220 hp.

The RL weighs 4k lbs and change. 4030-4070 IIRC.

Go back and read what you said and what I said. None of the cars in the 2005 mid-size luxury sedan class ran under 14 seconds in a 1/4 mi. Why are you comparing an RL to an Si or WRX? Apples and watermelons. Your Si could beat me off the line and in a 1/4 mile, but get me on the highway at 60, and you don't stand a chance. The RL would probably keep up in the twisties too.

All I was saying is that the RL you drove was expecting Grandma behind the wheel and you didn't wake it up. And for the competition, I will either compare the 2005 class to the RL, or let the RLX do the talking.

One last thing. Anyone saying an Si is Honda's bottom of the barrel is a disgrace to Honda owners. Put me up against a Civic DX and a laughing match will ensue from performance to quality and every technology in between.