Too bad that business model does not work anymore.....generalist cars are getting very good, lots of refinement and gadgets (just look at the newChevrolet Impala for example) so there is less and less space for a quasi-luxury brand in the marketplace...you are either luxury or you are not.

I do not see aspiring to become the Japanese Buick as a worthy endeavor....

 

Agreed, but luxury is based on brand, regardless of the merits of the car. You can't out Mercedes the real Mercedes or out BMW the real BMW.

If Acura really wanted to increase sales, they could start selling to rental car fleets and livery services like Cadillac does.

 

That was then, how about this recent decade ?

The V8 RWD program and the V10 NSX program were deliberately created for the Acura brand to go against BMW and MB. But it was Mr Ito (latest Honda CEO) who axed the above programs, that had finally sealed the fate for Acura - being that without those hardware in store, Acura will/can never attain the true-luxury auto brand status.

But it doesn't mean Acura cannot have BMW/MB in it's cross-hair.

If Acura's goal is purely to sell cars that are more expensive than the Civic and the Accord, the $30K TSX and the $40K TL have both attained that target all right.

Then why create the $50+K class sedan (RL/RLX), if Acura really doesn't have BMW/MB in mind ?

If Acura's goal is simply to stay above the economy Honda brand, it should not build anything above the $40K TL sedan level, because no one is stupid enough to buy a $50+K sedan from a non-upper-premium auto brand name. (The $60-100K VW Phaeton was the classic failure case in the US, in which a non-upper-premium auto brand tried to sell a premium-priced sedan).

Make no mistake. The $50+K RL/RLX is specifically built for Acura to TRY to go after the A6/5-series/E-class/GS class sedans, and also to TRY to elevate the Acura brand status towards those of BMW/MB/Lexus.

Still, Acura deserves our respect, because even after so many years, Acura is still trying, even though it has been going around in circles seemingly lost sight of future direction.

 

The answer to that is simple, my friend: Acura never wanted the RL. Traditionally (from 1996), the Honda Legend/Acura RL was something the Honda in Japan designed, engineered, and manufactured and then forced Acura in North America to sell. Acura had relatively little say in the matter. In fact, there was an article in the Wall Street Journal back in 2005 that stated that Honda wanted the design for the RL to actually be the design for the TL, but Acura pushed back. The result was the well-selling 3rd generation TL vs. the poorly selling 2nd generation RL.

I'm pretty sure if Acura had their way, they would just max out the TL/TLX and call it a day.

 

No it doesn't because is trying in an asinine way which is doomed to fail over and over again.

 

Ouch! I can't decide if you're being too harsh, or perhaps the truth hurts.

What makes it hard for me is that I know Honda / Acura knows how to engineer great cars. The problems Acura is facing are positioning, perception, marketing, budgets, and other fuzzy, BS'y intangibles.

I recently learned Honda / Acura has a secret museum in Los Angeles. Perhaps the key to Acura's redemption is in there somewhere:

 

Glad the RLX is selling. I will remain optimistic and wait for the Sport Hybrid to judge this model and its potential. 2 1/2 more months until Acura gives us more info about it! They typically have had a press embargo until 1 September on models released in the fall in past years, so that's when I'm expecting to learn more about it.

Have a nice summer, RLX watchers!

 

I REALLY like the new Impala. Decent looks, respectable performance, nice interior and has some lines that harken back to the Impalas of old. The question as is always for the domestics is long term reliability and hat won't be answered for a few more years yet.

 

The story of Acura NA not wanting the RL is well known and that explains the lack of marketing that occurred with that car. Let's also remember that that car received consistently positive reviews and even won some comparisons against the Germans. The RL also sold decently for the first couple of years until the rest of the competition caught up and Acura, as they did with the first gen RL, let the car languish and become irrelevant.

So....

I get your point that the RL wasn't THEIR (Acura NA) car, but if their answer to the flagship question is a loaded TL/TLX, then I think they are delusional.

 

I meant that Acura's preferred answer to the flagship question is to not have a flagship. I think that, if they had their way with the resources they have, a maxed out TL/TLX would be the top of the line sedan. They wouldn't even bother with a flagship, thereby staying out of the "true" luxury game. That's what Infiniti has done.

 

Exactly...the RL was excellent in the beginning but, as usual, they did not market the car enough/appropriately and they let it die without imrpoving performance/features during the years...

In this comparo in 2005 the RL finished second beating handly usual C&D darling BMW, the E60 530i

http://www.caranddriver.com/comparis...mparison-tests

 

...and it's safe to say that it doesn't look like the RLX will win any such comparisons.

 

Very cool. My favorites are of course the NSX (got to drive a '91 once), the 2nd gen Legend coupe and the Preludes. Always wanted one when was younger.

 

yep, not a fat chance...

 

Exactly! All Acura did was use the RL that they didn't really want as a guinea pig/placeholder. Meanwhile they figured out how to implement the RL's most popular features more cheaply in the USA designed/engineering/manufactured 4th generation TL. Once the TL was in stores, Acura stopped promoting or really improving the RL. In fact, Acura of North America chose to create the ZDX instead of improving the RL, which says a lot.

 

Yeah, and how did the ZDX work out?

If, as you imply, that the RL was simply a mule to test their technology then the fact that they let it languish is inexcusable.

Testing new technologies in your halo car is nothing new. Heck Acura did it with the NSX introducing VTEC and electric power steering and aluminum construction.

You don't see Mercedes and BMW abandoning their flagships once the technology trickles down. They continue to use those models for newer technology where as Acura just simply abandons the model completely.

If what you say is right, that Acura uses a model to introduce new technology and then let's the car languish only to then introduce a different car as the halo, then Acura is more lost and clueless than ever.

Is it cheaper to continue to refining and freshening an existing platform (eg. 7 series, S Class) with newer technology or introducing a completely new car? My bet is with the former.

 

Not only that but the Germans are very good at defending sales of their aging outgoing models introducing late improved/richer version to keep the model fresh and relevant....Audi is a very good example of that.

 

ZDX was a failure. They should have built the damned thing on the TL's platform and called it a TL coupe or TL Type S.

Please remember, the RL was not Acura's baby or American Honda Motors' baby. It was Honda Motor Corporation in Japan's baby. I don't think Acura wanted either the first or second generations of RL. They were just stuck with it from above. The fact that the 2005 RL uses a design that Japan proposed for the TL and AHM/Acura rejected speaks volumes. That's why the RL tends to languish until Honda's folks in Japan get around to creating a whole new generation RL to force down Acura's throat.

Regarding your question, "is it cheaper to continue to refining and freshening an existing platform (eg. 7 series, S Class) with newer technology or introducing a completely new car?" You are right, it is cheaper to refresh an existing platform. The RL, TL, TSX and Accord are all based on the same platform. As those cars were released, the platform was enhanced. It's just that the RL and TSX are HMC Japan's babies, while the TL is the "true" AHM/Acura North America baby. Either way, money is saved because of platform sharing.

 

Just wish that Acura could release the hybrid-AWD RLX sooner, so we can all see what's up inside Honda's sleeve with it's latest top-of-the-line flagship Acura sedan.

 

God, I should hope so. Does any new car not outsell its dated predecessor, especially when that predecessor went almost unchanged for 8 model years? How is the RLX selling compared to the 2G RL when it was first released in 2004? I'll give you a hint, it sold nearly 2,000 units in both November and December of 2004. At this rate, the RLX will be lucky to sell 4,000 units by the end of the year. Also, keep in mind the 2G RL was selling that many units with exactly one trim level.

 

Agreed, but what if Acura waited until late this year to release both the P-AWS and SH-AWD versions of the RLX? They would have lost several hundred units of potential sales. I think Acura basically released what RLXs they had as soon as they could. I think this is especially true because, like you said, the RL had been unchanged in 8 model years.

 

I think jhr3uva90 already answered the part as to why there's the RLX.

I personally feel that Acura going global and RWD platform must be done together. It's hard to get recognized without RWD as a luxury make. It's also hard to support a RWD platform if the brand does not go global since the volume will be quite limited. After all, Acura sedans account for around 2% of total Honda global sales. And Honda is already considered a small player in the world.

To put things into perspective, Acura sold about 150-160k vehicles last year. In its better days, annual sales is closer to 200k. Not sure what the numbers are for Chinese, Canadian, and Mexico markets, but I don't think the total is above 300k. For comparison, Mercedes Benz is targeting to sell 500k vehicles that are based on its FWD MVA platform (CLA, A Class, B Class, CLA shooting brake, GLA). There's simply no comparison.

 

So the conclusion is that Acura should not have built and sold any premium quality sedan above the TL class, because (1) it has no luxury-status/RWD-chassis, and (2) it has no worldwide presence.

Is it also a futile effort to release the $$$$$ NSX replacement car, since the release will not change the above 2 points ?

 

I think Acura knows that clearly. That's why they don't attempt to build a sedan in the 7-series/S-Class. The RLX is already a bit of a stretch as we can see.

The NSX project IMO is more of a design experience - to develop new ideas, new technologies, to show what Honda is capable of, etc. It's a car where profit is probably not an important factor since the volume will be so low. The development costs are high, but those technologies such as 7DCT and 3-motor hybrid torque-vectoring system can be applied to other mainstream cars. It also serves as a bridge between Honda F1 effort and its mainstream vehicles.

 

^^^^^

Displaying prototypes in major auto shows is more than enough to showcase new auto technologies and design experiences. No need to waste even more $$$ on building, marketing, and supporting a non-money-making production vehicle, especially that such vehicle will do little to transform the Acura brand to become a true luxury brand and to attain as many global sales as the top luxury brands.

 

Won't the new NSX be marketed as a Honda outside of North America and a few other markets, just like its predecessor?

 

I think Acura needs the NSX:
1. As a halo car to showcase their engineering capabilities.
2. To draw people/interest to Acura dealerships.
3. To kick Toyota's ass at the Nurburgring.
4. To give Acura a "sportier image".
5. As a test bed for future performance technologies.
6. To kick Nissan/Infinity's ass at the Nurburgring.

Just my two cents.

 

I don't buy #2 and even if they come in they need to buy something for it to be worth while.

At best it gets the name recognition going.

 

Problem is that we will have people saying "all talk, all show, but no go." Just like that V10 FR supercar that was caught testing. It's been designed and showcased. It's being raced in JGTC. But most people don't think that is enough.

 

Yes, for ..... HONDA. This is the bad part, and this is also the wasteful part.

Honda dedicatedly builds the NSX replacement supercar for the Acura brand, with the sole purpose of boosting the Acura brand's advance, premium, and luxury images.

After all, IT IS the premium Acura brand that needs the attention, the fanfare, the high-tech upscale image, and the prestige that the NSX supercar will bring; not the economy Honda brand.

 

Yes. It would be one thing if the car was called "Acura NSX" all around the world. But it will probably be called "Honda NSX" in Japan, Europe, and other places. So much for uplifting the brand.

By the way, will the Acura RLX be called "Honda Legend" worldwide like its predecessor?

 

Honda is also getting back into F1 racing. They just announced their location will be in UK. We have debated here investment in Acura to try to make it a competitive luxury brand. They have the money or can find it if they want. The investment in F1 proves it. They don't need to do F1 for engine R&D. They already supply engines to Indycar (albeit they are slow compared to the Chevrolet engines). How many luxury cars or marketing can you buy for a multi-year major investment in F1?

Here is a quote form a recent article:

"Racing Costs

The automaker, which forecasts the highest annual profit since 2008 as a weaker yen boosts overseas earnings, said yesterday the F1 racing series provides feedback for improving cars it manufactures in volume. The company had said in 2008 it saved at least 20 billion yen ($195 million) by dropping out of F1.

“It’s very costly to participate,” Yoshiaki Kawano, a Tokyo-based industry analyst IHS Automotive said. “Since Honda is coming back after being away from the racing series for a while, they may have to spend some extra on initial investments.”

Honda will develop F1 engines in Tochigi, Japan, where it is already working on a new 1.6-liter turbocharged V6, the automaker said yesterday in a statement.

Toyota Motor Corp. (7203), Honda’s bigger Japanese rival, dropped out of the series in 2008 as did Munich-based Bayerische Motoren Werke AG."

 

According to the quote you gave us, Honda saved $195 million by not being in F1 racing. Let's say it costs them an even $200 million to get back into F1 racing. Compare that to the BILLIONS of dollars it would cost to design, engineer, manufacture, and market true sport/luxury sedans based on a RWD architecture.

I would like for Honda to build Acuras that are similar to the Cadillac CTS/ATS or the new Infiniti Q50. I just don't think Honda feels it is worth the investment.

 

It's all about choices. As long as Honda chooses not to invest to Acura, they will be mired in the mid pack. They can chose to fund and hire top talent as Nissan has with Infiniti or decide to stay the course.

At least we will have something to discuss, although I'd rather be discussing how great their cars are and what a success and great pipeline of vehicles they have.

BTW; your numbers are a bit skewed. Nissan is investing billions of a muti year period on Infiniti. F1 will cost Honda way more than $200M over that period (I have first hand knowledge of past and present sponsor deals in F1).

These vehicles you want Honda to build are RWD?

 

Nissan/Infiniti will invest $10 billion over a multi-year period. I'm not sure how many years they intend, but I'm pretty sure it will be more than the $200 million per year that Honda might spend on F1.

 

617 RL/RLXs sold for July

 

There was an increase in sales as I had predicted as inventory has been going up steadily & average sales prices have been going down. Right now, there are ~1,900 RLXs out there & they are averaging ~$3,000 off. I think it helped as well that they are putting Advance models back out there.

For reference, there are 9,270 XTS models nationwide & people are averaging ~$8,000 off according to cars.com & truecar.com.

 

I guess it was a good idea for Acura to release the P-AWS version of the RLX and not wait for the SH-AWD version. I'm still waiting, though.

 

Well I am glad the volume is up. Some marketing might help that now.

 

Do we have any knowledge (even WAGS or SWAGS) how those sales figures compare with Acura's monthly sales targets for the RLX?