What are people complaining about? I drove my new RL from Northern VA to Charlottesville yesterday for an alumni weekend at UVA. The car held the road well, despite the curvy, hilly roads and the rain. Also, the car seems to have ample power to me. Maybe I'm easily impressed because I just traded in a 260 hp Acura CL Type S. Am I missing something?

 

It depends. If you are speaking of open road at about 80 mph and hitting it than yes with 300hp it should pull pretty well up to 100-120mph, but down low from 30,40,50 mph on up it is kind of sluggish compared to some of the $50,000 competition. Or even the $30,000 competition (TL, G35 ect.). Especially because most of the population probally drives from 45-85 mph anyway. This is where the power is missing. 260lbs of torque is not enough for a 4000lb. car. I would whip an RL all day in my 04 TL(AT) in this range, but the RL probally would come and catch me on the high end.

 

It may not be underpowered in its own right, as it's plenty enough to move the car itself.

But when compared to the competition, it just feels less powerful.
Even the M35x with only 280 hp is slightly faster than the RL.
And the GS430 with the same amount hp is noticeably more powerful.
Which is why I didn't like the advertisements which claimed the RL had V8-like 300 hp.
What they fail to represent is the torque numbers, and the RL is definitely lacking in that department.

 

I guess what matters for me isn't how fast the car accelerates but how well. I just traded in my Acura CL Type S. It had 260 hp, which was good. It also had torque steer, which was bad. It's a personal preference thing, of course, but I'd rather have a little less torque without the torque steer problem.

 

Torque steer is a non-issue in this class as all of the other cars are RWD/AWD.

 

Specs are great, but how many people REALLY by $50K cars based on which car gets does 0-60 .25 seconds faster than the other? I really think that most of the buyers in that segment are all about status. The Mercedes, BMW, and Lexus were the biggest sellers mainly because they are the best-known names. People still aren't used to linking the Acura brand with $40K+ cars yet. And the Infiniti M is having good sales mainly because of earlly-adopter hype. We'll see how their sales do in the coming months.

 

I do feel the same thing. RL seems a little slower in the start and the local city driving. I'm not sure where its 300 HPs and 260 pound-feet go to or how to transfer to its wheels. However, once I hit on the highway or get out of city, I feel this car is as good as other 5k vehicles.

So, in my last try, I shifted RPM high and this car moved well.

 

Yeah, manually shifting helps. The magic of gearing, you know.

 

I'd agree, the RL does seem a bit sluggish when starting from a stand-still. I have both an RL and Type-S TL, and the TL from take off feels to be much faster, especially when floored. However, the RL feels tight and planted compared to the TL.

Only complaint that I have so far about the RL...is that you basically have to floor the darn thing when starting from a stand-still to get going. The gas pedal seem hard to push at times...the E500 has this same problem (stubborn pedals).

 

My CL Type S is probably quite similar to your TL Type S. The second generation TL is truly an understated beauty. Although the take off SEEMS faster, that does not mean that the take off IS faster. I wonder what the acceleration times are for the TL type S?

 

It's not the power - 300 hp is just fine - it's the torque. The RL does not have enough torque and that is what you need to move 4000 lbs quickly off the line at low rpm. If it had a manual transmission it would be less noticeable, but then it wouldn't be a luxury car, only a sports sedan and the RL is trying to be both.

Yes a V8 or forced induction would produce more torque, but then it would have to cost much more than the $50K we paid, wouldn't it? The RL is a real bargain - I could have bought anything else under $80K which was my budget, and I chose the RL. I find BMWs ugly today and the materials they are using on their interiors look and feel cheap when compared to the RL or the Audis. Also, the BMWs I looked at had orange peel all over their paint jobs.

I am very happy with my RL. It has everything I want to - and then some - to be my favorite daily driver.

 

You'll be surprised the amount people that are buying $50K cars with performance in mind. I know at least 10 people out the top of my head that is under 40 years old and is driving a $50k car or more exspensive. This is a different day. Not all $50K buyers are potential Lincoln buyers anymore. More and more young people are able to afford more exspensive cars these days, and the younger people want styling and performance. I think the automakers realize this. That's why it's a HP war going on. Status is one thing, sales is another. Status does not pay the bills.

 

Don't let the other 0-60 nuts fool you. The RL has plenty of get up and go, it has ample torque for its class and moves with real authority, especially when pushed. It's just that it isn't enough for some people since other cars offer more.

More doesn't mean better though. Just more.

 

Yeah and msot of the population fllors their cars doing 35-55mph highway passes.

WTF...most of the population drive cars far, far slower than the RL.

Oh and you can get a Mits Evo for what, 30 grand and it will destory 95% of the sedans/cars out there regardless of price. I guess we should then be bitching those cars are slow!

Oh and anyone who buys an RL to race other cars on the highway or on city streets is a jackass who should ahve their cash taken away.

I have yet to see how the RL can be considered slow. It should be quick enough for everyone drivng on public roads....

 

They technically are correct and anyone who disagrees is a fool. Did Acura specifically mention any V8 powered models? No...so any recent car with a V8 then can be compared and the RL has similar performance to some recent luxo sedans with V8s. Until Lexus added the 6th gear to the LS430 it had similar acceleration numbers to the RL, so there you go...I could also bring up other sedans (Audi A8 before redesign, S430, etc) but I dont need to waste my time.

I do think that ad claim was silly to make since it is useless...many 6 cyl engined cars have superior or similar performance compared to V8 cars so it isnt something new.

I think Acura making that claim about the RL was simply to get the V8 wanting whores who jerk off to 0-60 numbers to look at the RL.

 

I didn't buy my RL to race other vehicles, but it does feel good knowing that your car can get up-and-go, and not just at highway speeds. I've had several drivers attempting to get me involved in a race while cruising in the RL. I've only had 1 experience with someone wanting to race while driving my wife's Jaguar. Chrysler 300C vs Jaguar XJ Super V8, I don't think so!! He was no match, I honestly think the poor guy mistook it for a regular XJ8.

However, I'm 99.9% positive that the 2003 TL Type-S is quicker from a dead-stop, when compared to the RL. I drive both vehicles. But again, I'm not in the business of racing vehicles, and i certainly didn't purchase my RL or TL for that reason.

 

wow you have a friggin Acura RL and your still not happy...some people will never be satisfied I guess.

 

I'm confused, to whom was the comment directed? (Don't worry, I'm confused a lot!)

 

Coming from a 2001 Acura CL Type S to an 04 RL, I'm pleanty satisfied with 231 low end tourqe !


I don't care about 0-60 times.....If I have the need for speed, hell I just jump in my 2005 MDX !!!

 

Believe me, you're not the only one confused.

 

 

I think you are a bit cheeky. Everyone buys cars for different reasons. Just because someone buys a $50,000 sedan, dosen't mean that they don't like power under the hood. Acura wouldn't boast about the 300hp if they didn't care about power and performance either. Another thing. You can't ever talk about needs with any $50,000 car. Everything about a $50,000 car is a want not a need. And the Evo comparison is null and void. That's comparing apples to oranges. The Evo is a $30,000 pocket rocket, and the RL is a $50,000 luxury sports sedan. Even though they are in two different price classes, the TL or G35 would be a better comparison than the Evo. That's like comparing a $25,000 Chevy Camaro to a Lexus GS430. It just dosen't make sense. Stop being silly. I know you get the point.

 

Early adopter hype?
What about just being a flat out good product?
Sheesh, give the M some credit.
I doubt it won a bunch of comparos because of hype

 

Drive a GS430 and an RL back to back and you'll know it's not even close.

 

no way! a car with a larger displacement engine is noticeably more powerful??!?!?!

who said they are comparable? acura didn't. the RL's competition is the gs300 and m35, NOT the v8 models. your argument makes no sense. also, nowhere did acura's ads say the rl had v8-like power.

 

LOL, you're the one to be talking about giving credit where it is due. the RL does fine against its v6 competitors. it's also nicely priced between competitors v6 and v8 models.

 

Actually, you are misinformed. They did advertise it and there's no need to further argue this point as other members can verify that.

So back to my original point, don't advertise V8-like power when it's clearly misleading.
Example, 300-hp V8 from GS430 vs. 300-hp V6 from RL.

 

I don't pay much attention to ads. What was the ad? What were the words?

 

I have never seen said ad?

I have seen articles written about the RL that say it provides V8 levels of power, but there is no official document from Acura that I can recall where it mentions RL and V8 in the same document.

And Acura has always made it abundantly clear that it intends to only target competitors V6 models, no V8.