db22

Have you noticed that it's only the TL owners that think that the TL is competition to the RL? I, like most most others in this forum, bought the RL for what it is and did not consider the TL. I checked out the 5 series, the E series, S Type and the RL. I'm on this forum so guess which one I bought?

jhr3uva90

Actually it is only recently that Lexus became a global brand. For example, the Lexus name did not exist in Japan until last August. Until then, all Lexus were sold as Toyotas.

I don't think Americans generally know or care what a brand is called elsewhere in the world. The fact that Lexus was the best-selling luxury brand in the U.S. before it existed in Europe and Japan bears this out. However, I do think that Acura should distance itself from Honda. On the other hand, one could argue that Audi has done well in distancing itself from VW, but Acura outsells it, and Infiniti is doing really well at distancing itself from Nissan, and Acura outsells it. So here are some questions: 1) Overall, does Acura really have a problem? 2) If so, would distance from Honda help?

db22

You make some good points and we should always consider the world market. All of the manufacturers mentioned would be bankrupt if they sold domestically only.
Check out a Honda Accord in England (TSX)
Infiniti/Nissan will be in trouble when their buyers realize that they have just bought a Renault!
And the AUDI TT was to be the next BUG without the flower vase in the dash.

mrdeeno

Might I ask which Renault platform Nissan/Infiniti uses for its products?

I think the only car that will shares a Renault platform is the Nissa Versa which isn't sold yet.

jhr3uva90

I'm not too sure if the Legend was the best performing Asian luxury car at the time. The Lexus LS 400 and Infiniti Q45 had both been around for a few years when the Acura Legend became the Acura RL. Also, sales of the Legend were decreasing during its final years, partially because of the aforementioned cars. In fact, I would say the first-generation RL was Honda's attempt to make a car that was less like a Honda and more like the Lexus LS (hence the styling, size, a very supple ride).

Although I realize that the current RL is the current Legend, I think the TL is more similar to the intent of the original Legend when it comes to size, price, and intended market. In addition, I think the previous-generation TL bore the closest resemblance to the classic Legend.

AcuraVic

Actually I haven't noticed. I considered the new RL a year after buying my TL. I paid cash for my TL and could easily paid cash for an RL. Not bragging, just giving the facts. I also looked at the E, the C AMG, G35, M45. I own a 2002 530I and dont like the new body on the BMW so it was not considered. I also considered a TSX but the engine was not strong enough for me. The same for the RL, I know it has more horses, but the added weight makes it feel 'slower' than the TL. But thats me, not you. After taxes and A-spec kit and chrome wheels the price on my TL was $41,000 plus.
Since the TL is leading its class in sales I would bet that there are others that considered the RL and the TL, then chose the TL.

I guess you bought the RL, and I would guess you are older than me.

AcuraVic

I agree with most of what you said. However, the Q45 has and always been ugly. The popular body/engined Legend was sold in the US in coupe and sedan form from 1991- 1995. I would agree Lexus cought up in 94, but not before then.

jhr3uva90

Yeah, the Q45 has always been ugly. However, I believe the Lexus LS first went on sale in late 1989 as a 1990 model. From a technical standpoint, the LS surpassed the Legend and pretty much anything else the Japanese made from day one. For example, the LS has always had a V8 engine, but Honda STILL hasn't put a V8 in a sedan, some 16 years later.

AcuraVic

Is that a bad thing that they dont have a V8? Wouldn't a V6 with 350hp be just as good? Sidenote, have you seen the LS460? Its as big as a BMW 745.

mrdeeno

a v6 with 350hp may be just as good, but where is this v6? when and if it comes, then we can compare if it's good enough.

Further, why are we aiming for "just as good"? shouldn't an automaker be aiming for BETTER?

but that's just power...what about torque? will it's torque match up to a v8 with 350 hp?

AcuraVic

By 'just as good' I ment Acura not needing a V8. Seeing that Honda has a truck, I bet we'll see a V8 in the lineup by 2010. I agree an automaker should not aspire to be 'just as good' as anyone.

jhr3uva90

What is Honda were able to generate the same amount of torque and hp with a V6 that others were able to do with a V8? Maybe with some kind of hybrid technology?

03TL-S

I dont think the Q45 has always been ugly...i thought it looked good when it was based on the nissan president. Also, the current one doesnt look all that bad...ive seen some pics where it was a simple kit and it looks hot. It just had bad marketing....but that will change with the next gen for sure

03TL-S

acura outsells it because acura's bulk of sales are from the tsx and rsx (cheaper cars). Acura it seems isnt seen as a true luxury brand. If you look in any comparo that compares acura to lexus, infiniti, bmw, mb, etc, they always refer to acura cars are near-luxury cars not just straight out "luxury" cars. They really have to work on their image

jhr3uva90

Actually, the bulk of Acura's sales are from the TL and the MDX. Those have been Acura's top two sellers by a long shot for the past few years. In addition, this is probably the last model year of the RSX. That being said, Acura cars are generally referred to as "near luxury" cars because they ARE generally near luxury cars. The top selling TL, like the top selling BMW 3 series, is considered a near luxury car.

AcuraVic

Like 'near beer'

jhr3uva90

The big question is: does Honda want a "real" luxury division? Is it worth the investment for them? Acura's doing well for Honda as it is. The TL helps extend the Global Midsize Platform and helps keep that Ohio plant busy. The MDX extends the Midsize Truck Platform and helps keep that plant in Canada busy. The TSX helps Honda to sell the Euro-Japanese Accord in North America, and even the RL helps keep the economy of scale for the Honda Legend going. If Honda wants to go with "real" luxury, they're going to pay to put out quite a bit of capital for a RWD platform, a V8/V10, etc. Is such an investment worth it to such a small car company, when they could spend their money on other investments like jet engines or more motorcycles? I guess we'll wait and see.

mrdeeno

Acura doesn't need to abandon "near" luxury, they just need to grow to become "real" luxury.

and the answer to your question is "YES", they DO want to be real luxury. That's why they designed the RL. That's why they priced it around $50k. If they didn't want "real" luxury, they would've stopped at the TL and called it a day and go build a jet engine or something.

Lexus did the same thing and succeeded. The bulk of their sales are the RX and ES, both "near" luxury cars. But they expanded their business upwards into the "real" luxury category by focusing on what consumers in this range want. YES i'm going to bring up CHOICES again.

Honda/Acura just needs to "grow up" and quit being so conservative. Take a risk with a v8. Take a risk with a RWD platform. When they risked it in the past, they did well (s2000, NSX, "Acura", vtec, navigation). Now they just incrementially improve what's already on the market (v6, ivtec, sh-awd, realtime traffic nav)

Please give us more choices! we have a right to choose! don't tell us what is good for us! get us laid! And take some RISK!

Even though they failed, you gotta give props to VW for risking so much bringing the Phaeton to market.

jhr3uva90

Actually, I think you got it backwards with Lexus. They started with the LS 400 FIRST, and then expanded downward. In fact, the near-luxury market was such an afterthought to Lexus that the first Lexus ES was literally a re-badged Camry.

I hate to sound cynical, but I don't think selling RL's in North America is Honda's top priority. The main reason, in my opinion, why the RL is sold in North America is to more fully utilize the assembly line where the Honda Legend is made. As far as the price is concerned, they basically too the manufacturing cost, added about 10-15% to get the invoice price and then added another 10-15% to get the MSRP, which comes out to just under $50,000.

I'm sure Acura (the North American marketing company) REALLY wants to go full luxury with something to compete with the Lexus LS, the Infiniti Q45 and others. The question is whether Honda Motor Company (the Japanese parent company with the engineers, assembly lines, and capital) are really committed to make it happen. We'll see.

mrdeeno

Right, but you can say the same thing about Acura. They started with the Legend. At that time, they could've developed the Legend/RL into an LS competitor, so we could've ended up with a full-lux RL rather than the mid-lux RL we have today. ideally, they should've continously updated the Legend and turned it into a true LS400/Q competitor, and introduced the RL as a midsize competitor to the GS.

jhr3uva90

Acura started with the Legend, which was a step up from the 1986 Accord (much like the TL and TSX are today). The Lexus LS, on the other hand, was a radical departure from other Toyotas. And that's the problem: you cannot continuously update into a Lexus LS-type vehicle. Honda tried that already and ended up with the first-generation RL. In order for Honda to compete with the Infiniti Q45, Lexus LS, and others, they will have to do something radical, not incremental. Honda will have to create a full-size, RWD, car with the power of a V8 (if not an actual V8 engine). Will the benefits of having such a car outweigh the costs of designing, engineering, production, and marketing? Also, if customers are balking at spending $50,000 for an Acura, how will they feel about a $65,000 Acura? Is the Acura brand strong enough to sell such a car?

mrdeeno

I think they have to do it regardless if they are strong enough or not. People balked when Honda said it was building an Acura division, that didn't stop them.

If they had no success with any of their models, then the answer would be a resounding 'NO'.

But that's not the case. They aren't considered a weak brand by any means. They may not have the prestige of other brands, but they aren't suffering in overall sales or profit, and the Honda parent company has a reputation for decent products.

It's only natural that they take another step or leap. Look at Hyundai...they are doing well and they are getting larger and larger and expanding their range. They are building on thier momentum and not just settling for where they're at.

What's so unusual is that Acura hasn't done this.

I was EXPECTING the RL to be my next car. I was expecting it to blow away the competition. I figured that since Acura was on a roll with the TL and TSX, and the current RL was 10 years in the making, that it would've blown everyone away.

That's exactly what they SHOULD'VE done with the RL: Fastest in its class - Check. Best handling in its class - Check. Best technology/options in its class - Check. Most luxurious in its class - Check. Best value in its class - Check.

I think they made 2 mistakes with the current RL.

1) They underestimated the competition...whether by choice or by accident. Since they weren't "known" for their mid-lux model, they should've built what was unquestionably the best car in the class. So unless someone were to buy a bmw or mb for the logo, they would've bought an RL. Infini-who? GS-who? the RL should've beat both of them at thier own games.

2) Focusing on value...this goes back to the first mistake. They could've given the RL a v8. They could've given the RL more tech options. They could've given the RL better standard rims, more features, etc. Shit, they had TEN years to design a v8! But I think they intentionally cut back on what they could've offered so they could maintain value. Classic bean-counters at work here. What they should've done is offered these "extras" in the form of options. Leave the "base" v6 RL as the value leader, but offer the options so anyone who wants to can option out a V8 RL to whatever point they are willing to pay. This will give the value shoppers the value RL that they want, yet give the shoppers who care more about power and options what they want, regardless of the value.

Think about it...if I want a cat, which costs $10, why are they trying to sell me a dog for $5 and saying I should buy it because its a better value? Acura should sell both dogs AND cats for $7. Then I can have what I want AND pay a good price.


So in conclusion, I think Honda/Acura should go ahead and offer another model above the RL while avoiding the marketing mistakes made with the RL. you'll never learn to swim if you never get in the water! As long as they have lifeguards on duty (MDX/TL), they're not going to drown.

jhr3uva90

Honda didn't underestimate the competition, it's just that the competition (for the most part) had RWD platforms to work with. Lexus is basing the IS and GS off the same RWD platform, Infiniti is basing most of their vehicles on the RWD FM platform. Acura has . . . the same global midsize platform that they use for the Accord. Loosely using your analogy, turning the RL into something more similar to their competition would be like turning a dog into a cat. Honda had no practical choice at this time but to go the VW/Audi route and bolt AWD to an inherently FWD platform. If they hadn't, the RL would be even more expensive than it is, and people would really be bitching. I like the SH-AWD on my RL, but it does make the car heavy and slows it down. The car is still plenty fast for me.

I agree that there should be a full-size Acura flagship, and maybe there is one in the works that we don't know about. Just bear in mind that such a car would be very expensive for Honda to develop and manufacture, and I don't know if it is worth it for such a small company, especially in a market that values "prestige" over everything else, including excellence.

Let's use Mazda as an example. They considered creating their own upscale division similar to Acura, but they decided that it wasn't worth the investment. Everything isn't for every one . . . or every company.

mrdeeno

That's just it though...Acura HAD 10 years to develop a rwd platform. It sure as hell wouldn't have taken them that long to build one. They developed a RWD platform SOLELY for the s2000...do they consider that a waste? The price of the s2000 in its day, and even NOW, is very competitive in its class for a platform developed for ONE car.

They developed a rwd/mid-eng platform for the NSX. It probably cost them a pretty penny to design, which is what makes it expensive, but it's mostly expensive because it's mostly hand built heavily using aluminum. But they did it.

What makes more business sense...designing a rwd platform that can be used to build many models and volume sellers, or building a rwd platform for ONE low volume model? how about building a rwd platform for ONE even lower volume model that wasn't even intended to make money?

They CAN build a RWD platform AND price it competitively and still make money...but I honestly think they underestimated the competition because they thought the accord platform w/ awd was good enough for this segment. I honestly think they underestimated the competition because they thought a 300hp v6 was good enough for this segment. And mostly, they're right...it's good enough. But again, a hyundai sonata is just "good enough" in its class also. they had 10 years to be THE BEST.


Why do people keep saying Honda is a small company?!? Honda is NOT a small company. They have the money to develop jet engines, robots, motorcycles, NSX's, S2000's, vtec, hybrids, etc. their revenue is HIGHER than Nissan's.

Further, Honda/Acura OUTSELLS Nissan/Infiniti, and they have been more profitable for a longer time than Nissan, so they are in a MUCH BETTER position to develop a new platform or engine. The problem is if they sit around and "rest on their laurels", others will surpass them which will make catching up more difficult.

Look at the SUV fiasco...Honda decided it was a "fad", until they realized they missed the boat, so they had to rebadge Isuzu's as Honda's or Acura's until they could develop their own. Not only did they have to eventually develop an SUV (and even a truck), they were late to market. They're already late to market with a volume RWD platform and V8...and its costing them every day. They've already conceded that they need more than a v6, hence they are building a v10 for the NSX successor, which by my guess will be used in more than just the NSX. This may just be a form of saving face...so they don't have to "admit" that they ever needed a v8.


Mazda is a bad example. Mazda didn't decide it wasn't worth the investment, it just didn't make sense because of the market conditions at the time...something BEYOND their control. This was the same time that Acura, Lexus, and Infiniti were slugging it out for the top spot. I wouldn't have entered the ring either at that point.

Acura is a competitive player in the upscale market. I have no doubt in my mind that they want to want to expand upwards. The only question is, are they willing to take the necessary risks to get there, or are they goign to play it safe and try to do what has always worked for them in the lower market segments?

Saintor

If Honda would have not underestimated the competition, they would have developed a RWD platform.

Instead of going AWD, they should have put emphasis elsewhere. Like building a bigger car, less anonymous.

At the same time, BMW and Mercedes are selling ton loads of E-Class and 5-series. Acura certainly missed the boat.

richard52

Bottom line Honda does not promote the Acura brand. Compare the number of tv,radio and print adds for Acura to those of BMW and Lexus. I see adds promoting the 3 series all the time and hardly ever see an add for the TL. Promotion makes a difference. Acura sells the most exotic and expensive Japanese car in the American market(NSX which has been discontinued but is rumered to be replaced in 08). Does anyone except autophiles know that? Honda need to promote Acura as a luxury brand.

jhr3uva90

To start out with, Mercedes and BMW are selling "ton loads" of cars because they are Mercedes and BMW, period. The automotive press are generally disappointed with the new 5 Series, but it outsells the old. The E-class is reviled by the automotive press, J.D. Power, and Consumer Reports, yet it outsells the 5 Series. The simple fact is, people generally buy or lease (mostly lease) $50K vehicles for status, first and foremost. Mercedes and BMW have had DECADES to build such status and brand recognition. That's why Mercedes can build mediocre cars that require massive emergency recalls, but people procure them anyway.

As I have said ad nauseam, the automotive industry is capital intensive, and might not make business sense for Honda to develop a full-sized, RWD car at this time. As a shareholder, I trust they know what they are doing.

Oh, and by the way, the RL is roughly the same size as the E Class, the 5 Series, and the others. They are all mid-size sedans.

A final point: people seem to confuse popularity and quality. If they were one and the same, Wal-Mart would be the America's best bookstore instead of simply being its largest, by default. Or the most popular film of 2005 (Star Wars, Episode 3) would have won the most Golden Globes and Oscar nominations, instead of being pretty much shut out. If you want to be popular, that's fine; there are many E Classes and 5 Series for you to lease. If you value cars that are more reliable with more high-tech features for the money, go for the alternative: the RL.

Guy Legend

The styling is polarizing, but the dissapointment comes from reliability and the annoying i-drive.

The 5 series is the best seller in its class by far.

jhr3uva90

My mistake on E-class sales. Also, I think some in the automotive press are disappointed with the fact the new 5 series keeps losing to the Infiniti M in car comparisons.

1HOT NSX

Why do people continue to buy unreliable expensive Benzes and ugly, cheap interiors, overpriced Bimmers? Because IMAGE IS EVERYTHING!

jhr3uva90

I can almost understand the BMW 5 Series, although I think the previous generation was a little bit superior. The Mercedes E-Class is another story. It's a beautiful car, but I don't think it is stellar in any category. It's basically average compared to its competition with an above average price relative to its competition.

mrdeeno

In this class, image is a BIG factor. Which is why 5's and E's sell so well. But image has to be earned and developed...and that's not done by selling cars at a major discount and selling a lot fewer than your rivals.

So the only real rivals to the RL are the GS, M, A6, and Caddy. I didn't even consider the E, 5, or A6 or Caddy because I'm a stickler for reliability...it's a PAIN in my ass if I have to take the car in for problems, aside from minor things that can be fixed when in for service.

And I've been to Denmark several times...it's fun to ride in 5 and E series taxies.

Again, as I have stated many times, my opinion why the RL doesn't sell well is that it doesn't offer enough options/trim levels. When moving up the price scale, there are more and more choices which makes competition more fierce. The only way to compensate for this is to offer more variables (options, trims, etc.) of a certain car to get the widest range of buyers as possible. The RL offers NO major variables so the range it covers is smaller than its competitors. The freakin' Accord has more trim levels, engine choices, and options! Do you think the accord would've been competitive with the camry if it never offered a v6? It's the same story with the RL, except it's not just ONE rival, it's many!

I would have definitely bought an RL had it offered a v8 comparable to the M45. But alas, Acura doesn't cater to people who want v8. They don't cater to people who want rwd. They don't cater to people who want a major sport option. They don't cater to people who want a "premium" option. They cater to a narrower range than their rivals, and as a "luxury" nameplate, that's their biggest problem. This in combination with the "image" factor makes for a major handicap.

TSX69

Oddly enuf, the Acura salesman called me today to ask about my TSX & if I wanted to trade for an 06; I told him if I bothered w/ another Acura it would probably have to be the RL. He asked what did he need to do to make it happen so I said sell me an 06 @ invoice & he said that was not likely. So I brought up how slow it has been selling & he actually tried to deny it ... I expect to hear back from him @ some point bc I know they are gonna wanna move some RLs.

jhr3uva90

I think he should sell to you at invoice!

psteng19

LOL, maybe it's selling better in some regions/dealerships than others.

jhr3uva90

I think sales differences are truly regional. My guess is that the RL sells better in colder, hilly areas and not so well in warmer and flatter areas. That's why a FWD option might be a good stopgap measure to decrease the price and increase sales.

TSX69

@ this point, I may even try for less than invoice *lol*

The dealership is in the central part of NC - not the mountains so relatively flat. Few ice storms but usually mild weather so I do not think that AWD is necessary for the area.

If they take out options, make it FWD {which I think means that they have to detune the engine to avoid torque steer} & sell it for say around $40k, would that not basically make it in the same segement as a TL? This would also mean that they serioulsy need to make a true flagship sedan.

jhr3uva90

Actually, I've been mentioning something similar in another thread, "Less Loaded RL?" I don' t even think they need to de-tune it. Let the customers deal with the torque steer. Chances are, a customer who doesn't care about whether the car is FWD or RWD doesn't know or care about torque steer, either.

And Acura needs to work on its brand name before they build real flagship, otherwise it will sell even worse than the Infiniti Q.

psteng19

I don't think it will get anywhere near as bad as the Q45.
Under 100 units a month???

jhr3uva90

Well, if people are hesitant to spend $50K on an Acura, do you think they would pay for a $65K Acura?