Liftedoff420

alrite guys im on my final legs. i was supposed to buy a TL this weekend but there was only one available in my price range and i wanted to test drive more

heres my final choices

1. 1999, 100k, will need timing belt soon, has some minor cosmetic defaults, 11k

2. 2000, 91k, havent checked it out yet but owner said it had the recall done, 10k

3. 2000 tl, 80k, never had transmission done, 10.5k



im leaning towards #2 but i heard that 2000 tls had worse transmissions than 99s...IS THIS TRUE????

i also talked to an acura dealership guy and he said the transmission problem was most common in the type-S

i test drove a few TLs this weekend, definately a nice car and im loving em
should make a purchase in the next few days

samkws

3.

you can go and chekc out the tranny since it's still in warrenty, it's gd until 100k miles

alleyesonmeee

I say...Number 1 or number 3. The 2000 TL does have a worse transmission than the 1999, I am not sure about the Type-S vs. non Type-S. They have the same tranny, the only thing that would make a difference is maybe the people with the Type-S drive harder

Jaadu

My personal recommendation is invest your 10k in another car especailly because of the plagued tranny problems these cars have. Especially with the fact that your tranny warranty expires at 100k, you'll be assed out if it dies after and forced to foot the bill of 3 -4 grand making u feel cheated.

My suggestion buy a different car w/o tranny issues, obviously all cars have their downfalls but this is a little too expensive of a downfall to fix out of pocket not to mention dangerous. And that whole theorey of how the TYPE S are the ones with tranny failues, You'll find is just a lie. Many TL-P have had their trannies replaced.

Also I dkont know if this can be done, note down the VIN# of the cars and call up HONDA directly and find out if that car has had its tranny already replaced and if so how many times. I hate to be negetive but I'm sure you'd rather here this now before blowing 10K of your hard earned money.

Also the only reason Im saying all this is because the TL's your considering are pushing the expiring limits of the tranny warranty. Thats the only concern. Good Luck.

alleyesonmeee

Yes it can. The 99 TL's hardly EVER have tranny problems, but they do exist. Also, the tranny failure rate may seem high from the posts on this forum, however, it is a forum and many people come here only for problems. The actualy failure rate is still < 10%. I would say to go for a car with less miles on it than 80K. However, many 99's are still running their original tranny with no problems.

nobody020

Did you get around to test-driving car #3? If you don't get it, I might. :-D

Also, when you finally do decide, don't forget to tell us.

vipvop

I have a 99 TL - tranny went at 109,000 miles. If you could try driving the 99 around ahead of time you can see if it is at least changing gears hard, if so avoid it at all costs (although it might just need the tranny fluid replaced, I wouldn't chance it).

Right now I'm dealing with trying to get acura to cover some of the cost of the repair since I'm just barely over warranty, but honestly I'd just get a different car (unless you don't mind paying another 50% of what you paid for the car to get the transmission replaced (well almost 50%, ~$4,500)).

Comet2404

My 99 TL's tranny went at 98K.... fully covered by acura. I'd choose number 3 though.

Type S Lady

Choose another car man!!!

Shift_it

To me they all are overpriced. Unless I got lucky!!

I got a 99 TL w/ 100K for $7500.00

But since, if you have wads to throw away, I say purchase the 99 and jack the BOSE hu out of the 2000 model.

99 model reported less tranny isssues. I been on the same shopping strip as you. I choose the 99 Model.

Liftedoff420

shit i just found a black 2001 with 56k for 11.4k

i might be going with that one instead....44 thousand miles of warranty

Liftedoff420

yo nobody check out the clist...

theres two black on tan TLs, ones a 2000 with 51k going for 11k
the others a 2001 with 56k going for 12k

im checking them out later tonight, they are located in brentwood

just a heads up

vtlec01

85% of tls have no tranny problems.

Green2000TL

I have 77k on my 2000 TL and no tranny issue yet. I go with car number 3 on the initial list, but the 2001 with 56k sounds to be a much better deal.

nobody020

Hey. Those postings look a bit suspicious, but..tell me how it goes.

HustleLikeM0FO

Why dont you just get a car you can afford..... getting older luxury cars with a ton of milege cuz they are cheap is one of the stupident things a person can do mostly because maintence on them is fairly expensive. If you only have like 10k to spend on a car dont get a luxury car with a ton of miles cuz they are 10k..... get somethign newer and more reliable that you can actually afford.

JJ4Short

I wouldn't get any of them. I got my 99 TL with 55k miles for 12k back in August.

Liftedoff420

i have the money dont trip

i have like 15k, but i only want to spend like 10-11 on a car, plus ill be getting a job soon

the other money is for rims and whatever else

i'll be checkin em both out in a few hours, i'll give you a heads up if they are sketchy nobody020

fsttyms1

id go with the 2001 56k. thats a good one.

Tunaboy

99 TL's did not have a recall on the tranny's. 99's are 4 speeds and the transmission was upgraded to a 5 speed in 2000 which was then recalled. The 2002-03 Tl/CL are where the major problems in the transmission come in.

Jaadu

Nicely put, and I know this doesnt apply to Liftedoff420 but there are a lot people who make these types of decisions. So people who buy brand new TL's for 30k can go and buy used BMW E55's with tons of miles on them but obviously not the money wise decision.

For that much money on a car I'd rather buy myself something else preferebbly new. People care about labels too much these days but I guess even I'm like that to a certain extent. Society is to blame.

nobody020

well, i don't know if it's especially the label or anything.

Let's compare two similarily priced vehicles:
A lightly driven Corolla 2003 (maybe around 10-20k miles) in perfect condition
and
A well driven Acura TL 1999 (maybe 60-70k miles)

If these two cars were the same price, would everyone go for the Corolla?

Obviously, I'm not the best judge of this, but I feel like at least a good portion of people will go with the Acura. Not just because it's a label, but because it's the only way someone could get a desired amount of performance at that price. So is it really about the label? And is it really that stupid to buy a well-used car instead of something really new?

MikePA

No offense, but people are responsible for their own actions. 'Society' doesn't force anyone to do anything.

I wouldn't buy any of the three cars, I think they have too many miles on them, even without the potential tranny probems.

If I were liftedoff420, I'd take the extra $5k he says he has and buy a newer car with less mileage and buy the 'rims and whatever else' later. Rims don't look good if car's sitting in a service bay or parked somewhere waiting for repairs.