Rexorg

Just got my copy September issue of Motor Trend. The RL got 2.5 stars, as did the TSX. The soon-to-released TL got 3.5 stars sight unseen. The Hondas on the other hand all got at least 3.5 stars and the S200 got 4 stars. IMHO, this does not bode well for Acura in the future. I wonder what the ratings will be for the MDX and RDX in next month's issue albeit both not getting MMCs until '10?

catsailr

I haven't received my new MT, but I don't put much faith in their ratings. When the 2nd Gen RL appeared as a 2005 model, most all the the car mags had it rated high. I think the RL has been improved each year, so why do their ratings drop so much?

You have a good point about Acura and Honda. I traded my 05 Honda Pilot for an 08 CRV. I considered the RDX, but couldn't justify the $7K difference, the 4 mpg less mileage rating, and having to use preimum fuel. Also, according the Kelly Bluebook, the projected resale in 3 years for the RDX is 52% and for the CRV 60%. Based on these figures, the RDX would be worth $1,400 more than the CRV in 3 years.

gavine

Magazines rate products based on what the manufacturer spends with them on advertising. Simple as that.

lumpulus

+1 on gavine's post, and to add to that, Motor Trend has always been a rag, always trailing behind R&T and C&D, although they all kinda stink now.

jhr3uva90

Acura competes with BMW, Audi, etc. Honda does not. Expectations for Acura are higher. Unfortunately, the TSX (Honda Accord) and the RL (a re-hash of what is essentially a car that's been on the market since autumn 2004) don't really meet those expectations. At least the TL is an all-new design.

CL6

For once, we agree.

Rexorg

The TSX is on the back page. That is a pricey place for an ad in/on any car mag.