Hello all, I'm looking for info on the RL's performance wise. I'm debating on buying one but I don't feel super comfortable on spending this amount of money on a car that runs 15's in the quarter. I was just curious as to what performance upgrades are available to shave a second or so off the quarter times. I'm not looking to race this, just want to have the extra power for fun. I'm a diesel performace guru at heart but I want to have a very nice car too. Always been a big Honda fan. Anyways, any help on learning whats available for aftermarket would be a big help. Many thanks.
Dan

 

I dont think the 2nd gen RL is for you. Other than a CAI, there isnt much in the way of performance mods for this car. If raw power is what you need, I suggest you consider a different car. There are no headers, supercharger or other parts like that available and I'd doubt there would be enough interest to stimulate production of such parts. The RL didnt sell in great numbers (something like 3000+ units for the entire 2006 model year). Get yourself a TL Type S, or if you can, wait until next fall when the 4th Gen TL will be coming out, which will likely have even more than the current Type S at 286 hp.

 

You gotta talk to Touge. I'm sure he'll weigh in on this thread shortly.

In the meantime, check out this thread
https://acurazine.com/forums/showthr...?t=2663&page=1

 

Welcome to AZ. If you're looking to shave a second off the 1/4 mile run for this car, it is DEFINITELY not for you. You need to look at the TL on which this is definitely possible.

With that said, Touge, our resident RL mod guru and official vendor, is selling a modified AEM TL intake, various exhausts, and underdrive pulley. I have installed the intake and the 5Zigen exhaust, and have the distinction of being the only 2G RL owner to have attempted "before" and "after" dynos on my car. Click the "My car" link in my signature to see the puzzling, yet useful results and some post-mod pics of my car. Bottom line: 13-14 hp gain apparent throughout the rpm range and especially at the top end.

Excelerate, another vendor on our site, offers the Unorthodox Racing stock and underdrive pulleys made for the 3G TL, and they also fit the 2G RL. He also is selling spacers that fit our engines.

I have never tracked my car and use these mods exclusively for my auditory entertainment. I therefore can't tell you what my 1/4 mile is. I've thought about installing one of those little automotive computers that tells you this stuff, but honestly have other priorities. I'll get to it eventually, I guess.

 

Don't forget Excelerate has the throttle body spacer, too, although no one has tried that.

 

Lots of good reading in there. I think it's a shame there isn't more aftermarket for such an awesome car. I was never looking to turbo or supercharge it. Just wondered about CAI and exhaust etc... Wish somebody would make a chip for it. I'm still not totally decided on exactly what I want. I'm going to test drive an 08 model tomorrow as well as some TL's. I'm really drawn to the looks of this car and the AWD system really gets me hot and bothered I appreciate the info from everyone! I'm basically stuck between an RL/TLS or a new Cummins pickup. I already have an older cummins pickup so I really want to get a car, but after driving a new one, I'm stuck! LOL Completely different vehicles I know. We'll see how tomorrow goes at the dealer. Thanks again for the info and keep it coming!
Dan

 

This is a funny car in some ways. Most of us started out feeling it might be a little less energetic than we'd like, but then we later ended up deciding it runs pretty damn good after all.

Part of it is that throttle tip-in isn't as aggressive as on many sportier cars, so it's a simple matter of mashing harder on the gas pedal. Part of it is that the car is quiet (due in part to the Active Noise Cancellation system), and its speed is deceptive. And yet another part is that the engine takes several thousand miles to really get limbered up and running its best.

No, it won't turn 12's and 13's in the quarter, but then most of us don't do quarter-mile runs anyway. We accelerate up freeway ramps to merge with fast traffic, and we pass semis on two-lane highways, and we gas it occasionally to blow off some lamer blocking the fast lane. And in all those cases, the RL seems (at least to me) to have more than ample power. And I come from a long line of V-8 honkers.

So, maybe the other guys are right ... don't buy it for the quarter-mile ET figures. Instead, buy it for the sweet ride and handling, the superb navigation and Bluetooth systems, the voice recognition, the great sound system, the myriad electronic toys, the classy interior and comfortable seats, the understated good looks, and the sense of satisfaction it will give you when you cruise down the road.

.
.

 

Agree with Mike...this is a subtle and super-intelligent car whose charms take time to really grab you. If you like at at first, you'll LOVE it after you've driven it for some time. Plenty of power for all but the most testosterone-toxic driver, coupled with outstanding handling characteristics, reasonable fuel economy, classic good looks, killer technology and great creature comforts.

A pickup!?! Yikes, with the current and foreseeable price of fuel you might want to re-think that one.

Good luck with your decision!

 

I'm coming up on a year of ownership. My two cents is that the RL is just as enjoyable today as it was the first day. Actually more exciting now because I've learned the car. You should probably check out the cmbx and acc.

 

Definitely, if you can get a good deal on CMBS/ACC/PAX. The PAX perform decently enough, better than the OEM stockers, but if you are bent on getting new wheels and tires later on, remember to buy a spare. All those parts will cost you about $500-600

 

Me, too. With the altered exhaust and the CAI, I sorely wish I could tune the ECU a little to optimize AFR. I simply don't have the expertise or time.

 

Haha sorry I'm such a noob. Please explain what these are. This is really good information gentlemen. It's helping me very much. I'm anxious to get to the dealer and report back. Thanks again for the help and keep the comments coming!

 

CMBS = Collision Mitigation Braking System. It's a system that helps warn you of potential collisions ahead. But, it doesn't work real well (I have it) and has nothing to do with going fast

ACC = Adaptive Cruise Control. It's is a cool feature if you drive a lot on highways. It is a smart cruise where the car uses a radar gun to keep your distance steady with the car in front of you.

PAX = Run flat tires from Michelin. Nice for safety. They also are better for handling and ride noise then the standard OEM's. However, they add more weight below the springs (if you care about such a thing).

 

Mikey - I enjoy your enthusiasm and like reading your posts but I take issue with this statement. I read your other thread with the CMBS poll, though I'm unable to view your video on Youtube since it's "private". Having driven the 06 for a week now I've gotten the chance to see the CMBS/ACC in action and I think it basically works as designed. The CMBS seems to be more active with the ACC engaged on the highway. I've had cars swerve in front of me to fill the gap between me and the car in front and get the "BRAKE" message right away and felt the car brake and have even felt the seatbelt tug once. It makes sense to me that it's more active at higher speeds since the chance for injury is greater.

I couldn't view the box test that you did but I think the real issue is your expectations for this system. It's designed to mitigate the effects of a rear-end collision with the car in front. It sounds like you want it to be much more active in lower-speed situations, but wouldn't a system that worked like that be really annoying to deal with every day? I've had stage one activate a few times while driving in the 45-50 mph range on main roads when I got within a car length of the car in front. I think that's how you described your experience as well. And as soon as you touch the brake it goes away. I think the crux of the issue is how Acura marketed it (especially the commercial with the car emerging out of the mist) and the fact that there is no good way to test it without risking accident/injury. In the lower-speed situations where stage one activated for me, the car in front was still moving but slowing down a little. You have to assume the system would be more forceful were a car stopped in front of you. I noticed a Lexus commercial the other night touting their version of CMBS and it looked to work similarly.

I truly believe that a more active CMBS system would be a pain to deal with on a daily basis, giving off many "false" warnings in situations where the driver could easily brake or steer to avoid contacting the vehicle in front. Acura seems to have tuned the system to minimize false positives in daily driving situations while still providing the desired response in unavoidable accident scenarios.

I know others mentioned the same thing in the other thread but I'd be careful about claims that the system "doesn't work real well". It may not work as you wish it did but it does seem to function in accordance with the CMBS description I've seen on the Acura site.

 

do you plan to take the car to a track to do 1/4 mile runs? If so, logically you should want a diff car and I dunno why you'd take a luxury sedan to do that anyway.

If you do not plan to do 1/4 mile runs then why the heck does it matter?

Someone needs to show me the world they live in where these differences between car accelerations matetr so much. Take 0-60 times...How does a car doing it in 5.5 seconds (in perfect conditions mind you) matter soooooooooo much to one doing it in 6.5? 1 fuggin second in a day that has 86400 of them. SERIOUSLY.

 

Sorry, DW, you're right. Let me clarify. I agree the system works as designed. It just doesn't work as advertised.

90firstgen; If you're interested in CMBS, don't pay attention to the literature. Take it for a test drive and have them demonstrate it to you. Base your decisions on that rather then the video that shows it in action with animation

 

I agree with what Mike said but do wish it had more low end grunt. Several times in a passing situation at 20 - 25 mph, I've nailed the accelerator to pass and wondered if I was going to get smacked by the car closing from behind. I don't experience the problem in 70 mph passing situations. I wonder if the transmission is not kicking down to a low enough gear to take advantage of the RL's rev happy motor. Anyone else had this situation or is my reckless driving style asking too much out of 3.5 liters and 4400+ pounds?
wstr

 

Well gentlemen here is my report. I went to the dealer and they only had one new RL at the time. But sitting right next to it was a new TLS. And I'd have to say that the TLS is what really caught my eye. I was very attracted to the RL at first because of the awd and sweetness features. Definately like the looks too. But that TLS looked waaay good in black. So I drove it and I'm pretty well sold on it. It has a lot of the features of the RL and its a little sportier. You guys were a big help in my deciding factor and I appreciate your honesty. As soon as I get my finances in order, I'll be picking up a new TL type S. Its a good compromise that I'll be very happy with for a lot of years.

 

Does the TL-S have SH-AWD? If not, you might want to think again if you consider handling a big part of "sportiness"

 

Not to steroetype, but the TL-S is probably a better car for a 22 year-old anyway.

The only thing I wish the RL had from the TL-S is the ELS sound system. When I had a new TL-S as a loaner recently I liked the ELS system better than the Bose system in the RL.

 

I think you know the answer to that stupid question. The TLS pulls .91 g's in the slalom according to car and driver(?). That's pretty fockin sporty. If you think that isn't good handling then punch yourself in the balls.

 

Wow - that wasn't called for.

 

Trying to prove their manhood DW. Ignore the punks and maybe they'll go away.

 

No need for this kind of answer here. That poster's point was only to tell you about SH-AWD. It does make some difference in handling, especially if you buy A-Spec suspension and decent rubber.

Personally, I think if there was a way to shrink SH-AWD enough so the weight penalty was minimal, it would be a great addition to the TL. We will be seeing an AWD TL-S soon enough, as Acura has stated that SH-AWD will be available across the line in the future.

 

Raises a good point; what is the weight penalty for shawd? Has that ever been quantified? Does it really have a noticable negative effect on everyday driving and gas mileage? We certainly know the advantages of it

 

The TL-S has the same motor we do; exeception the 6-speed manual that we dont have.and we do sufer alittle on AWD wieght but thats why we have lightwieght hood -trunk and carbon fiber driveshaft to shed those unwanted pounds.

 

IIRC, the SH-AWD alone adds 200 pounds to the weight of the RL. I'm quite sure that it would have been worse without a (light) carbon fiber propeller shaft.

Remember, the RL got it first, and I'm sure Honda engineers, creative as they are, are figuring out how to make it lighter to improve gas mileage. That's what I love so much about Honda. They may not know squat about marketing, but they are an awesome engieering company, which is why I buy their products.

 

Just looking at the MDX and the RDX, their version of SH-AWD removes the variable acceleration device which overdrives the rear wheels from 0.7% to 5.7% or 1.7% to 6.7% depending on your sources. The MDX/RDX system constantly overdrives the rear by 1.7%.

That seems like a mechanical simplification of the system right there and it must save weight as well, but probably only what, maybe 10 pounds?

The RDX info says the acceleration device is deleted because the handling requirements of the vehicles are different. IIRC, the RDX shunts only 45% to a rear outside wheel vs 70% of the RL, and the MDX shunts only 50%.

 

Ok so maybe I was a little rude.... but hey, it was a smart ass comment he gave me so i gave him one back. Anyway, yes I wish the TLS had the SH-AWD. I just simply mean that it still handles exceptionally well without it. I would gladly sacrifice 200 lbs. for amazing handling and traction.

 

Lateral G numbers are nice, but you have to look at the big picture as well. The RL pulls .89 g's, not a huge difference between the that and .91 when you're on the street.

Once pushed past the braking point however, I'll take the SH-AWD over the front drive with limited slip set up to bring the car back under control. Having had fairly extensive seat time in both cars, I feel it is definitely easier to bring the RL back into control once you have pushed it over the edge. The RL will oversteer or understeer at your command, the TL can only understeer and plow.

That said if I was buying a car today and had to choose one of these, I'd probably be taking the TL type S. No offense to the RL owners, but I'm not old enough to be one of you yet.

Punching your self in the balls is never a good idea, if some one suggests it, you shouldn't listen, even if they seem really credible.

 

yeah, i think you should go with the TLS, seems like you're not old enough for an RL yet

 

I agree....Thanks for backing me up on this one....I wasn't trying to be a smart-ass.

 

Ah, watch out my friend. You're 33 and the transformation is around the corner. Some day, in another couple years, you'll be in the car of a Twenty-Something person and be thinking; man I wish he'd lower the volume a bit on that radio.

A few years after that and you'll be 40. Aside from magically needing reading glasses overnight, you'll start being concerned about the morality of the youth. That's when you know it's over

 

HEY! I resemble that remark! I'm only a bit more than 6 months from 40. I already need bifocals and am greying.....you mean I'll have to convert my car back to stock, too? Noooooooo....

 

You need one of the wood bead seat massagers. We'll put that in your Xmas list. Oh, and maybe curb feelers too...they will look awesome on the RL!

 

No, I don't think guys ever outgrow their preference for cars. I think we are forced to "evolve" based on more practical issues. I recently got rid of my 3000GT because, well, my body just didn't bend like that anymore It happens I guess.

 

ROFL. I'm a decade past that, and now I'm sure people my age saw me at 18 and figured the country was doomed. Tempus fugit.