New Consumer Reports auto issue is out (4/07).

So I went on their website to see what all the fuss is about with the Infiniti M35 and what they thought of RL. Not much on RL is included at all, but when you dig deeper into the side-by-side comparisons, I was really surprised they rated the M35 so much better than RL. Personally, I think the M35 is a great car, and before I got my RL, I had owned 4 Infinitis and all were terrific. But I just prefer more luxury than sporty, so I decided on the RL.

I have an 05 and they gave "poor" scores on the RL that model year for brakes and audio. The audio in my 05 is outstanding and I've never had issues or heard others who've had issues with brakes.

Just curious what other think about CR's opinions on RL.

 

Unfortunately, CR is just one in the long line of mags and such to rate the RL poorly than is deserves. I have an '05 and have had no issues with the brakes or radio. Both are stellar...

 

We just discussed this last week, HERE's the thread. In that discussion, I felt, along with others, that CR wants something different in its car reviews from car enthusiasts. To the average CR reader, a car is just another appliance and that's how CR views it. They are entitled to their opinion. Their main objections to the RL are that it is not much larger than a TL (they feel the TL is a better deal), and that the car overall is bland.

As far as the 2005 reliability ratings, they reflect the teething issues the 2005 RL had. The 2006 ratings improved.

 

If it isn't a boring econo-box or Grandpa mobile with dead-solid reliability, then CR doesn't like it. They're safety Nazis who value boredom over performance...don't listen to 'em.

 

CR's basic beaf is that they don't think that the RL is worth15k more than the TL. Furthermore, when they tested the RL they had absolutely no idea of how to get the most from SHAWD. Their opinion on the system, however, has been evolving, on the RDX they said the system works but probably most drivers wouldn't notice the improvement at normal driving speeds. The test on the MDX, they are starting to glow on it. Personaly, I think they should test the car again now that they have "learned" how to drive an SHAWD car. They could test the tech version.

 

I think the editors of CR are a bunch of cheap bastards. If they don't think a Japanese-manufactured car with SH-AWD, aluminum sub frames, etc. is worth more money than an FWD car made in Ohio, then that is their problem. It is funny how they don't think the RL is worth more than the TL, but magically the M35 is worth more than the TL, even though the M and the RL are roughly the same size.

 

I can't stand CR...they're a bunch of biased hypocrites. I could go on forever on those jerks.

 

I'm quite puzzled about the dissing of the RL by CR too. I think it's still a hangover from the 2005 model- all the problems it had. CR didn't test the 2006 RL for the 2007 issue, they just reprinted the '05 findings, and added MUCH IMPROVED 2006 reliability ratings.

I'm happy that people here have had no problems with thier 2005 RL, but unfortunately there were many problems with that vehicle. One of the reasons I know this is because I had a long conversation with the service manager of my Acura dealer. The guy's a straight shooter and told me that for 2006 models there were very few problems, and the '07 have been perfect so far. Obviously I read people's complaints here and other internet places about the '05 RL.

I have a 2004 TL and there were many issues with this car even though I was one of the fortunate ones who had virtually no problems other than having to bring it in for recall items. Unfortunately it seems that first year production for Hondas have trouble and CR isn't very forgiving about it.

I went on a rant on the CR thread I started so I'll just hit a few points here. CR accepts no advertising, CNET and PC magazine and all the others do. I'm in the advertsing business, this doesn't mean that all these other magazines are corrupt and not unbiased, but it does mean that they could be. Think of the relationship that the advertsing department, writers and car manufacturers have- there are contrarian objectives at work.

I'm amazed at the CR write ups on the RL because they value safety- one of the safest out there, reliability- HONDA/ACURA is ranked #1, and value- much less expensive than the M, BMW, AUDI- so much. One would think that they would therefore rank the RL at the top. I go back to what I said at the onset, there's a hangover from the 2005 model. Additionally CR wrongly thinks that the RL is an expensive TL. One of their writers responsed to a posting of mine in the CR forum that I should either buy the TL or go for the M. HUh? The M gets worse fuel economy and Nissans are less reliable cars than Hondas. I was shocked by his response.

Bottom Line: I value what my freinds/acquaintances say about their RL, what the service manager of my Acura dealer has too say about the RL, and what you all have to say about the RL more than what CR is saying. The CR review still recommends the RL by the way, they just don't rate it as highly as the M and some others.

 

Define "problems." If you mean number of Technical Service Bulletins (TSBs), then the 2005 RL had "problems." However, most of the TSB were essentially software updates, much like Service Packs with Microsoft Windows. Unlike Windows, there is no hard drive in the RL, so physical modules have to be replaced to update software, much like old video game cartridges. The 2006 and 2007 models already came with those updates.

Also, I understand what you mean about advertising, which is why CR is so well-respected. But I also understand the English language and what can be implied from what was written in the article. When a writer states that s/he can't understand the "big knob" in the RL, or if there is no mention of voice commands as an alternative, that speaks volumes about the writer. In this case, the CR's writers are definitely not high-tech people driving a high-tech car. And maybe that's one of the reasons why the RL isn't selling that well in this country: it is a high tech Japanese car made with high-tech Japanese people in mind being sold in a country (USA) that doesn't really want that much tech in a car.

 

Fair enough. I'm getting ready to pull the trigger on an RL purchase in the next 2 months so you're basically preaching to a member of the same choir. I don't know all the problems the 2005 RL had specifically, but no one is happy about having to make multiple appointments with their dealer to get a TSB fix. I understand that the problems were mostly electronic in nature. I could definitely see a CR writer giving a mediocre rating on functionality because they didn't understand the "big knob". That doesn't explain their other negative comments.

 

If you waited a while (which I did), you could get most of the TSB fixes done in one trip. People who bought the 2005 during its first 3 months had to get multiple TSBs done, just like people who are upgrading to Windows Vista right now will need multiple updates.

 

sorry, wrong thread