pazbien

I have been deciding on a new car for months. Either a new Accord v6 Fully Loaded or a Used low mileage Rl. Honda dealers have not wanted to go lower thatn 27,000$ on the Accord so I was thinking about spending as much on used Rl.

So far I found 2 cars that I like:
12,348 mile 2008 Acura Rl $34,897 TECH
16,343 mile 2007 Acura RL Certified $28,000 (non-Tech)
32,400 mile 2007 Acura Rl TECH $28000

What should I offer? Thanks a bunch.

miner

2007 Non-tech gets my vote. PAX tires on Tech pkg could be a probelm in the future.

CFoote

The new Accord has a lot of the RL's technology built in, but thats to be expected since the RL is now 4 years old.

Having said that, the RL is still built better than the Accord. Drive both and see what you think. If you think the Accord will get you where you need to go, nothing beats a new car. However if you appreciate the better build quality and features of the RL, than I would go that direction.

acuda

I think you only have to worry about PAX if the car has the CMBS option. I'm not sure about particular years but I think the "regular tech" package without CMBS did not include PAX.

Any others know if I am correct here?

SSFTSX

Honda Accord has alot better fuel economy and cheaper to maintain. But RL has Style.

neuronbob

The 2007 Tech package was the equivalent of the 2006 non-tech package--e.g. no CMBS/PAX.

I'd get the 2007 Tech rather than the 2008 Tech or the 2007 non-tech.