Colin

All luxury product across all consumer products gets very subjective above a certain price point. Is a $50K Krell Monoblock home amp really 10X better than a very good midrange brand like Adcom or any other $2-3K amp? Is a Mac running a Core i7 really 2X better than a Dell running the same processor?

Point is that above a certain threshold, people pay ever larger sums of money for smaller and smaller returns. How far up or down the 'retail pyramid' you slot yourself into, depends on your budget, and personal tastes. IMO, nobody should try to impose their values on someone else.

jhr3uva90

I think Warren Brown's review gets the RLX. Most auto reviewers see BMW as the sport sedan gold standard. They don't take into account items that might be important to the people who might actually own cars long term such as features (if I'm going to commit to a car for 8-12 years, I want state-of-the-art gadgets), long-term reliability, maintenance costs, and real-world driving conditions (i.e. being stuck in traffic every day). Instead, auto reviewers cater to enthusiasts. That's a shame, and I've discussed that at length already.

Regarding RWD. Yes, that would be nice, but is it worth a relatively small company investing billions of dollars? I think that huge amount of money would be better spent on marketing. For example, Infiniti has been making excellent RWD cars since 1989 and they still don't get the sales and respect they deserve. Sure, the Infiniti G might currently outsell the Acura TL, but what's the per unit profit margin for the G versus the TL?

Finally, I predict RLX sales will rival the Infiniti M's once the sport hybrid arrives.

BDoggPrelude

I 100% understand the concept of diminished returns when looking at luxury vehicles in this kind of price range but Acura needs to offer more to their customers that are spending twice as much as a comparably equipped Accord. I'm not imposing my opinion on anybody. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out the value just isn't there when comparing the RLX to comparably equipped/priced vehicles from other luxury brands.

BDoggPrelude

Honda a relatively small company? You mean compared to companies like GM, Ford and Toyota that rely on global fleet sales and a lineup of like 100 vehicles to pad their stats? The Accord, Civic and CR-V are always among the top 3 sellers in their class. I'm looking at Honda as a whole. How much money has gone into developing the new NSX? How many are going to sell? How much money will be lost on that venture? I would say that if Honda/Acura can put forth that kind of dedication into developing a vehicle they know they are going to lose money on in the end, they should be able to take a bit of risk in developing a new platform that could be used to better at least two of the vehicles in Acura's lineup.

And I'm pretty sure the Infiniti M is like the second slowest selling car in its class, (right behind the RL/RLX), so you aren't exactly shooting for the stars there.

KeithL

It is and I have tried it at various sensitivities and for me it sucks either way.

jhr3uva90

Has anyone done a feature comparison of the RLX versus the Lexus GS or Infiniti M? Of course, none of these cars offer the bang per buck of Hyundai.

KeithL

I for one am not digging the new Lexus interiors. To me they don't flow. It is like the main dash was designed by different people than the center console.

jhr3uva90

Good point. I think I like the Infiniti M's interior out of the 3 Japanese cars.

BDoggPrelude

Right. Furthermore, do a feature comparison with a fully loaded Ford Focus. Again, I understand that there is a certain wall you hit where value begins to diminish with added cost. I get it. A lot of what you get in a luxury car is going to be materials, build quality and performance. Again, still not going to amount to the added cost. Then there are intangible things like driving experience, styling, brand pedigree, etc. A BMW 5-Series can command a higher price point even when it may not, on paper, have many more features than an Accord Touring, because it possesses those intangible qualities. The RLX has none of those things.

KeithL

Ditto! Why spend all that money for the NSX? Is that really going to convince someone to buy the RLX or TLX? Spend the money on a RWD platform of get an efficient AWD system into all your models. Acura is the ONLY luxury wanna be that does not have a RWD platform. Even Kia/Hyundai are in the RWD luxury market. They had SH-AWD and should have put it in every model, sure they can still offer a FWD model just like Audi. Style a decent car and give each model an edge SH-AWD and people will come.

noobie

I hope so. Otherwise it's an epic failure for a brand new model against one long in the tooth that is not exactly setting it on fire.

jhr3uva90

The biggest intangible BMW and Mercedes have is their recognition as brands. This is why the Infiniti M, Lexus GS, and Audi A6 don't sell nearly as many units in the USA as the 5 Series and E Class. This is also why Hyundai's Equus will unlikely ever come close, regardless of how good it is, which is unfair and unfortunate.

Back to the RLX, the devil is in the details. If a customer can't tell the difference between the Accord or the RLX or doesn't care, they should be the Accord. That's why it is prudent for Honda to offer both cars. I think I'll go check out the Accord so I can see if I can tell the difference.

BDoggPrelude

I'm not saying consumers won't be able to tell the difference between an Accord and an RLX. Anybody can drive an RLX back to back against an Accord and see for themselves that it is a more substantial vehicle. I also do not think that people will be cross shopping an RLX with an Accord. The point I'm really trying to make is that Acura needs to do something to distance itself from Honda. Really, it is sad that we can even sit here and compare the RLX to the Accord. Acura needs to do something to make up for its lack of brand pedigree/heritage/brand recognition. Trying to compete with its RWD based competitors with a FWD vehicle by adding some kind of trick all-wheel-steering system is ludicrous. How much money did that take to develop? Look at where the 2G RL was when it was released. Torque vectoring AWD was a technological masterpiece that has since been copied by other companies. It was a massive leap forward from the 3.5RL. Now look at the 2013 RLX. Where does it stand compared to that? What about it is innovative in the least? If you ask me, it has taken a big step backward.

KeithL

I have not done a line by line check, but if I had to compare them as I have been cross shopping all 3 lately, I would say Acura and Infiniti IMO have mostly similar tech. Lexus to me is lagging. They have blind spot warning, but not intervention. They just added asaptive cruise, but I can find it in any car or any option package, even on their web site they list it, but you can not build a car on their web site with it. I like the Lexus head unit, other than the stupid mouse controller, love the huge LCD. All 3 have their own On Star like service. The M head unit is lagging as there are no apps other than their On Star like service. The M 5.1 audio is decent, but not in the same league as the ELS Stuido, Krell or M&L systems. The M has had good tech available since 2010, blind spot prevention, collision prevention, adaptive cruise, lane departure preventions, adaptive headlights.

Now an Infinit M37 Sport FWD loaded runs around $63K when you add in the deck lid spoiler and splash guards, which is within dollars of a comparablely equipped RLX. The Acura would get the advantage on the audio and having more up to date tech including the cool LED lights, but the M tech is similar, just a little older. The M is RWD 330HP beast. Yeah I may seem biased, but I was planning to get out of my M at the end of the lease in 5 months, but as I have spent the last 2 months cross shopping everything possible I may be back in a loaded M. I ruled out the RLX after a 45 minute test drive when I was not impressed with the ride nor the styling.

I looked at the GS a few times and few drives. Overall the GS interior while plush, feels like dash and center console don't flow. The mouse controller sucks. That said, it rode nice, very quiet inside. BTW the $60K GS has exposed trunk hinges that can crush you stuff, totally inexcusable in a luxury car.

On a bang for the buck scale the RLX is king, but for fun to drive, M Sport gets my vote. The Lexus wins on long term resale and overall experience. I was not able to drive a GS F Sport because they are so rare, that might have bumped up the GS in the fun to drive category. For me right now if I had to pick between the 3 I would get a M37 Sport with tech package. The new CTS has me wanting to maybe extend my lease before deciding to order a loaded M.

KeithL

I'll take the other side of that bet, but we need to look 6 months after AWD intro. M was selling 1K units a month first year and has tapered off to 600 a month 36 months after introduction ( it went on sale March 2010). The SH-SH-AWD is not going to have a huge impact on sales after the first 2-3 months. Especially since it will like be very rare.

My prediction, RLX sales peak around 800 units a month and drop down to 400-500 a month by this time next year.

I honestly hope I am wrong, as I love Acura, but they are quickly loosing me.

jhr3uva90

What's wrong with comparing the RLX to the Accord? The Accord is a great car. A customer should be pleased to have an Accord. Besides, some people compare Audis to VWs. BMW and Mercedes don't have popular counterpart mainstream brands. And again, it is all about the brand for most US customers. That's why the Lexus ES outsells the superior Infiniti G and the Lexus GS outsells the superior Infiniti M. Most luxury buyers don't know FWD from RWD and don't care. After I test drove the GS last Sunday, I listened in while a salesperson tried to explain FWD versus RWD to the customer. The customer didn't get it, didn't care, and got the ES instead of GS.

Honda does not have the sheer size or access to capital that Toyota, GM, VW, Renault/Nissan or Daimler do. I think they need to pick their battles, and mid sized RWD sedans isn't worth it. In my opinion, they are better offf swinging for the fences with a halo car, even if they are forced to sell that halo car for a decade to cover costs.

WheelMcCoy

I understand the pros and cons of FWD, RWD, and AWD, but what is it about RWD that defines luxury? I get leather seats is luxury. I get a library quiet interior is luxury. I get a chauffeur and grey poupon is luxury.

But except for enthusiasts, do most buyers know the difference between FWD and RWD? Would a wealthy, older RLX driver care?

jhr3uva90

Nope, people don't know or don't care. That's why Mercedes is making the FWD CLA. And I bet the automotive press, after dissing Japanese FWD sedans for years, will fawn over the CLA.

BDoggPrelude

I would say that it is, at the very least, a perceived luxury item. You also have to keep in mind that, while those people may not be actually swayed one way or another based soley on RWD vs FWD, many if them are swayed by the reviews that come from publications like Road&Track where the opinions come from enthusiasts that do care what wheel drive a car is.

weather

This is the biggest problem we have....many people say what you just said, to them, losing the SH-AWD on the RDX has been a big mistake and has set the RDX backward. Yet, looking at the RECORD sale figures, Acura execs will say, screw what the enthusiast wants, lets produce more vehicles like this!

With respect to the other conversation about RDW and luxury....I think we have a classic "chicken and the egg" discussion here. Are RWD vehicles identified as luxury because the RWD per se, or because BMW and Mercedes, which have been identified as a Luxury brand, has the RWD platform? If you guys remember, back before the late 80's or so, most cars were RWD and few of these were called luxury.

BDoggPrelude

Hard to compare if you ask me. Luxury sedans are tested pretty heavily based on performance...SUV's, not so much. I would say the RDX is selling well because the design was toned down, it looks more like a Lexus now and it has a V6.

When FWD was first introduced it was actually considered a luxury item. Of course, that was back before cars were really judged based on handling. When European luxury sedans started becoming more popular that all changed. Not that long ago all Cadillacs were FWD because they were favored by older people that didn't drive their cars hard and preferred the easier low speed motoring provided by a FWD vehicle. Cadillac realized their sales were declining because all of those older people were dying off. What did they do? Start making the switch to RWD platforms in an attempt to garner more interest from younger folks that want a vehicle they can have some fun it. Did it work? Yes.

KeithL

MB went FWD for costs and at $30K point those buyers want the badge more than they know the differences between FWD vs. RWD. As to what makes RWD luxury, it is not so much luxury as the way the car drives. I drove FWD most of my life and did not get it until I owned my M. Is it a huge difference, maybe not, bit having driven my M for 3 years and recently test driving competitors cars I can say that if I had my preference I will take RWD or AWD before FWD. That said I would not turn my nose at FWD, but there are plenty of people that will discard FWD if only for the perception that is is inferior and associated with lower end cars.

weather

I would not say that a FWD handles better by any means but I think that a decent AWD system "a la Acura's SH-AWD" can sure offset the fwd bias of a vehicle and give it great driving capability. It is a true 50/50 balanced car, not but it is still very decent to drive and IF it would looked amazing on the outside and inside with innovation and luxury inside, I am sure people would be more than willing to give it the respect it deserves. I think Acura has no one to blame but themselves in the last few years. I just hope they wake up before its too late.

BDoggPrelude.....your comment about the Cadillac is spot on however, one part I am still confused is about the RWD/FWD and Styling. Almost at the same time that Cadillac went to their RWD plateform is also when they injected excitement into their interior/exterior designs. So is the RWD what brought the buyers back, or is it their design, or a combo?

That is why that I am still saying that Acura could, if they wanted, bring their brand and sales up if they did some amazing vehicles and this, despite keeping their SH-AWD and not going RWD....but they will have to do incredible work to overcome or compensate for the RWD lacking in the lineup. We all know what Acura needs to do but that Merek guy is still there.....

For example...why is Audi deemed as a luxury brand despite having FWD and Quattro? Because they design AMAZING looking cars!

noobie

The CLA is a $30K car. If people didn't care why did Cadillac almost die when they churned out those FWD Cimmarons and the rest of their FWD cars?

People care, the sales prove it, whether you think it matters to them technically or not.

noobie

The majority of Audi's sales are quattro.

GoHawks

Blind Spot Monitoring is not a big deal anymore.

My son's 2009 Mazda 6 Grand Touring has BSM. I have it in my Cadillac. It should be a standard feature in a flagship sedan.

BDoggPrelude

AWD is a perfectly acceptable alternative to RWD. Dry road handling is closer to RWD than it is to FWD and bad weather traction is better than either one. Acura's last great innovation was SH-AWD. They were on the right path and the original plan was to have the entire lineup consist of SH-AWD equipped vehicles. Now they are backtracking.

It's impossible to put a definitive finger on what has mostly attributed to Cadillac's recent success. Going back to what I said previously about automotive publications swaying a consumer's decision on their next vehicle, I think it's safe to say that the switch to RWD has been a big factor in their success. Prior to the CTS, I don't remember ever seeing a Cadillac product in a head to head test against a European sport sedan.

Keep in mind that, while most enthusiasts will go out and test drive various vehicles to develop their own opinion before purchasing, a large percentage of consumers will purchase based what they read in magazines and advice from their friends that are more enthusiastic about cars than themselves. How many people out there get the "new car itch" because they started reading about a new car in an automotive publication they happened to pick up while they were waiting for a plane at the airport? After seeing a new car on Top Gear? I'm an automotive enthusiast, as I would assume most people reading this are as well. You know how often people ask me for advice about cars? How often are you asked about cars? Even though they only account for a small percentage of new car sales, enthusiasts pull a lot of weight in the automotive industry.

GoHawks

The first gen CTS is what put Cadillac on the map. The car was criticized for a cheap looking interior (common complaint for GM in the 2000s), but it received positive feedback for it's sporting handling, driven by the RWD platform.

The second gen CTS introduced in 2008 improved the interior materials, added AWD and bumped up the power. It was positioned in between the 3 series and the 5 series. It was sold at 3 series prices for a car with 5 series dimensions. The main knock on it was that it was a bit heavy.

Cadillac gained more credibility.

Now the ATS comes out on an all new platform. Balanced handling, much lighter chassis. A true legitimate 3 series contender by many reviews. Now the next gen CTS comes out and is supposed to go head to head against the 5 series.

Whether the CTS will be a 5 series contender like the ATS is with the 3 series remains to be seen, but one thing is evident.

Cadillac had a plan to gain respectability and they have been executing on it. The only thing left to be seen is if Cadillac has the long term reliability.

Acura just seems to be repackaging the same formula and expecting things to be different.

jhr3uva90

There was an interesting article in the Wall Street Journal about a month ago. For all of Cadillac's efforts, they were still being outsold by Acura. Whatever formula Acura was repackaging was working.

However, Cadillac outsold Acura for the first time during the month of March. Now it's a party! Let's see what happens for calendar year 2013, especially with production of the RLX ramping up and a new MDX coming this fall.

GoHawks

Once the DTS was discontinued, the CTS was the ONLY car in the Cadillac lineup for a long time, joined by the SRX CUV and the Escalade. Compare that to Acura with the RDX, MDX, ILX, TSX, TL, and any nominal ZDXs and RLs they sold. With all those cars and also the fact that I read that the MDX accounted for a third of Acura sales, and it's not that impressive that Acura outsold Cadillac.

Things have changed now that the ATS and the XTS were introduced. We'll see how much more the new CTS helps. The Escalade is being introduced soon, along with the new (actually VOLT based) ELR coming out soon and Cadillac should have enough models to make a game of it.

Top it off with a rumored true RWD flagship that is supposed to legitimately go head to head with the S Class and the 7 series (XTS was a stopgap to appease former DTS customers) and things should get real interesting with Cadillac.

jhr3uva90

The next TLX will be crucial for Acura. If they get it right, it will help them substantially. If they mess up the TLX, Acura will suffer.

JT4

IMO for the same reason Lexus spent all that money on the LFA. To create a "buzz" and to get people talking about their brand.

Lexus loses money on every LFA they sell, but made it know from its debut that the LFA was to showcase what they are capable of, and to test out some of the technology that may eventually make it to “real” production vehicles.

For example, the LCD instrument cluster that was introduced on the LFA has now made its way down to the 2014 IS F Sport models. Even the center stack layout is derived for the LFA as well as some styling cues.

As of now in 2015 Lexus is planning on introducing a production version of the LF-CC concept vehicle that will be derived from a lot of the LFA tech.

By showcasing the NSX with all their new tech Acura would create a lot more buzz, emotion and interest then by showcasing their newest tech in a 4-Door sedan and IMO this is what Acura needs.

Sonor Kid 2

I haven't driven either yet myself and intend to soon but the gap has decreased significantly since 2005. The cost for development and where the car is made aren't things that are going to sway me to spend $20K+ more, either are the other minor upgrades.

The Accord may have 278HP vs the RLX's 310 but the RLX is 400+ pounds heavier, I doubt you will see a major difference between the two when looking at performance.
My major gripe with the RLX is the exterior, this is where I'm impressed with the Accord and a big reason people are attracted to a specific car to begin with. For example, look at the wheels Acura put on the base and navi equipped RLX, they look like a carry over from the TL. Really?
When I look at an RLX Tech vs an Accord Touring there is a $21K price difference, now I know you get more with the RLX but not enough more.
I understand Colin's point when looking at diminishing returns but the thought process is different today, there are less people willing to spend significantly more money on luxury items in this economy unless the overall value is there. I guess we'll wait and see how RLX sales progress over the course of 2013...

Here's my biggest worry, if the RLX is Acura's flagship sedan what will they do with the next TL?
They certainly can't upstage the RLX and if people are disappointed with this car how is Acura going to position the new TL?
If they can come up with an exterior design that hit's a home run and the price tag is where it needs to be the rest won't matter as much in my view.
These two areas is where the RLX missed the mark IMHO, I guess we'll wait and see...

jhr3uva90

I think the purpose of the TL has always been to upstage the RL, to some extent. The RL has always been engineered and designed by Honda in Japan with little input from Acura. The TL, on the other hand, has always been more of Acura in California's creation. In fact back 10 years ago Acura rejected a design that Honda in Japan wanted them to use for the TL. Instead, Acura in the USA created the 3rd generation TL's design, and Honda of Japan used their proposed design for the 2nd generation RL instead. The rest is history.

I think Acura in California will take the best of the RLX, put it in the TLX, manufacture it in Ohio, and sell it for less money (while still making a profit). The only issue I see with the upcoming TLX is the design. Acura must get the design right this time. They have no margin for error.

GoHawks

There is truth in the discord between Honda Japan and Acura NA, but to allow that dysfunction to continue is a sign of poor leadership.

SSFTSX

RLX 310 bhp are DI. Accord 278bhp are non DI. Its a big difference once you drive it. 400lbs shouldnt matter.

Anyway Yen has fallen by 25% in past 3 months. Honda can afford to give big discounts. and lower the Advance model price to $50k.
RLX is more quieter and nicer interior/ exterior quality and lighting is more upmarket.

Sonor Kid 2

When I look at cars like the new Lexus IS I'm really hoping Acura can come up with something in the new TLX that can compete on all levels.
This is part of my disappoint with the RLX...
Never a big Lexus fan until now, after seeing the new IS I'm very impressed, beautiful car.

jhr3uva90

Man, what a beautiful car! Honestly, if I were in the market for a compact car, I wouldn't even look at Acura. I read an article in some car magazine recently that compared the new IS to the new Infiniti Q50 (G37 replacement) and they are way beyond what Acura has cooked up lately.

It's a pity, but I think Honda Japan sees a different purpose for Acura than we do. I think they see Acura a simply a way to extend their current platforms (which better spreads their fixed costs) and a way to experiment with new technologies that they can propagate to their other models. I really don't think Honda has the "fire in the belly" to build real sport/luxury sedans. Again, that's too bad.

GoHawks

Horsepower and Torque numbers are what they are, whether DI or not. If you take a two engines that have identical HP/tq ratings and one is DI and one is not, the DI isn't going to be faster. It may though be more fuel efficient and provide cleaner emissions due to a cleaner burn.

The RLX has 272 ft/lbs of torque, the Accord V6 has 252 ft/lbs. Direct injection is most likely one component of the increased HP/torque numbers of the RLX.

Having said all that, while everyone quotes horsepower, torque is what is really important.

The extra 400 lbs of weigh on the RLX will negate the extra 20 ft lbs advantage it has over the RLX.

Unless of course you factor in the "superior wheels and larger diameter" of the RLX. (Tongue implanted firmly in cheek).

iforyou

iTrader: (1)

RLX with its 310hp engine isn't much, if any faster than the Accord V6 6AT.