anoldpunk

Assuming your question was directed towards my post, sure they do, especially so in the luxury market. To completely ignore that would be a huge marketing mistake.

Not intending to start a debate on the number of gears required per a given car design. Just saying it's a factor many buyers consider when comparison shopping similar designs.

MyCarIsntInMyWifesName

The truth lies somewhere in the middle.

Do a lot of people skip on the TL based on its gear count? Probably not. However, savvier buyers wanting to get their money's worth (who doesn't) will be looking at many things that the TL lacks compared to many other sedans in the general price range, and to many, having a transmission with less gears than the other isn't a deal breaker but a slight disappointment.

I would expect this applies mostly to make shoppers, primarily ones of the AWD model that are a bit more enthusiastic with vehicles.

Pete2010

To the average car buyer, the car is simply a utility. It gets them from point A to point B. You really give the car buying public way too much credit. The average buyer of a luxury car is probably going to be older, will have more money. When they get a car, most often it's because of the nameplate (BMW,MB) and nothing else.

6 isn't always a better number of gears. The Infiniti's have 6 and can't seem to make up their mind on which one to be in. BMW has 7 and sounds like they've got it figured out.

Again - we're thinking most car buyers are anything like us. My wife is that average car buyer, and she can't tell the difference between my factory 18's and my RJ 20's. Her car gets her to work and home. Most people don't care. Most people don't like the look of the TL, plus its a much more expensive TL, which reduces the pool of buyers.

smarty666

I don't like to nitpick but just wanted to correct that the Infiniti's have 7spd autos and not 6spds but your correct in that their are some problems with them in hunting for the right gear and the computer. Supposedly, Infiniti is aware of the issues and are suppose to be engineering a fix that won't be introduced till the next gen G so hopefully that will correct it!

Pete2010

Ahh yes, you're right, I don't know why I was thinking 6... But the key this is that more isn't always better. If the company can't implement it correctly. Just like the 5AT is lacking on the TL, the 7 is lacking on the G. Sounds like BMW is one of the few that got the 7spd right.

Will be cool to see a fix for that, I would definitely take that for a test drive.

MyCarIsntInMyWifesName

No, you're mistaken. I'm NOT in the camp that thinks the TL's sagging sales are from a 5-speed automatic and a goofy grille alone.

What I did was outline that the TL's 5-speed is just one thing on a list of things that the car lacks compared to the competition, which is likely IS losing sales as a result of.

Pete2010

While I don't want to get into a back and forth of why the TL sales are bad.. that horse is long dead. And I wasn't referring to yourself, I am referring to the average car buyer.

The average car buyer wouldn't even visit this forum, let alone post on it. The large segment of the population looks for features, but not like we do as enthusiasts. Savvy/Knowledgeable car buyers like yourself (and myself) will look @ the 5AT and say that's a disappointment. But the large segment of the population would not even know that their automatic car has more than a couple gears, Reverse and Drive.

I would love to get the opinion from some of the car salesmen on here on what people ask for when looking for a new car.

Scotten

I'm a former 2G owner (2002 Type S), and still kick myself for trading that car in after only 2 or 3 years.

After test driving and sitting in the 4G (which I love, btw), I think one issue is the car is very masculine. The meaty steering wheel, the number of buttons, etc. Whereas I've noticed a lot of women driving earlier TL's, I have a feeling the new ones don't really attract many female buyers.

Any feedback? Personally, I don't consider this a bad thing, but Acura might...

MyCarIsntInMyWifesName

Especially in this economy, people want to get the most that they can for their money. In fact there are article such as this one floating all over.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34578441...siness-autos//

No people do not glance at the spec sheet and go "OMG it's a five speed. Screw this." I don't know what to say to you anymore to get you to understand that is NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT what I'm saying. They ARE, however, noticing missing features and actually a lot of people are interested in transmission at this level, if not on a make or break level.

Pete2010

You're confusing understanding and agreement. I totally understand what you're saying. And IMHO, I don't agree. I think you give the average car buyer too much credit. But this is where I'd love some input from people who actually sell cars. Because I'm curious to see what people are asking about when they buy their cars.

winstrolvtec

While there is a group of enthusiasts who are disappointed with the lack of a 6AT or higher on the TL, there is another group of enthusiasts (and arguably the most enthusiastic) who are quite happy with the availability of a 6MT, which at the same time, few others offer instead, especially combined with AWD.

black label

In my experience they don't really care about the 5AT vs 6AT vs 7AT. I have to agree with you about the "general car buying public" petec2010. I think we (anyone who is reading this), simply by the fact that we frequent a board like this, exclude ourselves from that group.

BigWopHH

petec2010 is spot on in my opinion. I would even go a step further. It's not only the average car buyer that doesn't care how many gears are in a transmission, it is the VAST MAJORITY of car buyers. The uninformed buyers, average buyers, informed buyers, and even many enthusiasts. Car salesmen reading this thread are laughing their ass off.

There are a number of people on this board that are hardcore enthusiasts, that have the 5AT, and they chose it above other cars that are being used as examples in this discussion.

I'm a tech guy and like to think that people care about how fast the processor is in their computer, or how powerful their GPU is, but the fact of the matter is, the vast majority buy their computers based on budget and aesthetics alone. It's no different with cars.

The few people MyCarIsntInMyWifesName reference, that "aren't buying some cars because they are noticing missing features" don't amount to a hill of beans in terms of total units sold.

KeithL

I don;t beleive that MOST people know much of anything about the car they buy. I beleive if you asked MOST AVERAGE people, regardless of the class of car they bought, for sepecfics on their car other than high level info I doubt many people know much about what they buy in a car. Most people it is either a very practical money decision or a totally emotional/status buy.

MyCarIsntInMyWifesName

I bet I don't given my business.

Wrong.

BigWopHH

For the sake of respectful discussion, what percentage of people--TL buyers specifically--do you think are informed enough to make / or not make a purchase based on the "missing features" that you reference?

Pete2010

And that is? No offense, but I don't know what job you could hold that would give you that kind of information about such a broad range of car buyers. You'd have to interview large groups of car buyers or car salesment to get significant stats on that topic.

But whatever, I get it. Everyone wants to be correct on the internet. I'm not saying I'm right, I'm just giving my opinion.

No kidding. Most people I've seen in my area driving 4G's are much older (probably over 50). I bet maybe less than 10% of those people cared about many of the features in the car. They just want a car.

MyCarIsntInMyWifesName

I won't even begin to speculate.

However, in my trade (which I will not delve into in hopes of preserving my anonymity) my clients usually have the "new" cars. Obviously I go through more than one client a day. LOL

I will tell you this much- especially since the crash of 2008, people are more informed about their big purchasing decisions when I ask them (which isn't required of my job but many respond positively when I comment on their new vehicle).

More importantly, the buyers of these 40 thousand dollar cars are better educated, smarter, and richer (obviously) than the joe buying a 25 thousand dollar Accord. These people are more in tune with their decisions and what I have personally found is EXACTLY what Ford claimed with their EcoBoost Taurus, MKT, and MKS buyers. The ones that buy the EcoBoost are smarter, younger, richer, and better educated, and not just academics, but their purchase decisions. THIS is where I find that NO, a transmission doesn't kill if for them, but it DOES go along with the multiple things these TLs are lacking nowadays.

MyCarIsntInMyWifesName

This has nothing to do with me wanting to me right. If we could stick to the topic rather than he hehawing on and on with personal bullshit, that would be great.

I also don't "interview" car buyers.

boe_d

I don't know if I'm the average car buyer or not. My current TL is a 2001 model and I'm very happy with that purchase - it runs nearly as well as the day I bought it and only has about 90,000 miles on it although that is LA traffic so it probably has as many hours on the road as most people here although it is in stop an go traffic on the highway and surface street. I probably won't be the average reader here as many people here seem to be far more interested in putting about a 400 HP engine in a TL than gas mileage (I'm not putting that down - just saying I'm more concerned about MPG although I don't want to go below the performance of my 2001 TL in terms of acceleration).

That being said I was considering a new car very seriously and what I would have liked to convince me to trade in my old TL for a new one -

1. A nicer looking car than my old TL (I don't feel the new TL is even as good looking as my old TL although all the models up to 2009 were much better looking IMO.

2. I don't need more acceleration than my old TL but about 25% better MPG would have been nice. I think they should have made something with similar pickup to my 2001 TL with much much better MPG and then a type S with a hefty engine for enthusiasts looking for lots of HP but not quite so concerned about MPG. Surely in a decade since my car was released they could improve the gas mileage. I remember a VERY long time ago in my youth, Honda was obsessed with fuel efficiency. I bought my first new car, a Honda Civic, after many crappy used Ford Escorts. With a stick that sucker could accelerate VERY nicely even though it had a tiny little engine and got great gas mileage. It was a wonderful car; such a vast improvement over the escort and only about 15% more expensive.

3. A chilled cup holder - might seem like a little thing but I would have liked that for long drives to Vegas.

4. A touch screen for the GPS - I'm not insinuating they should eliminate the knob - just have a touch screen AND the knob for those of us who prefer quicker input like my old GPS has on my 2001 TL.

5. A quieter ride/better sound insulation. The new TL is much better than my old TL but not nearly as quiet as the Lexus. I do prefer the "feel" of the TL for driving over the Lexus but I spend an absurd amount of time on the road and I have to take a lot of business calls in my car and don't want to have to speak in a strained voice over the roar of the road.

6. A slightly slimmer steering wheel. I'm a guy and have pretty long fingers but I'm not the only one driving my car and so I'd prefer the old steering wheel of my TL over the new one. I do prefer the all leather steering wheel of the Acura over the partial wood wheel on the Lexus.

I list these things not to put down the TL, but these are the things that would have gotten me to put down a ton of money to get me to replace my 2001 TL and weren't in the new TL. I just didn't feel there was much of an upgrade from my TL to the new TL. I'm sure there are things that many here would say are a big improvement over my TL and I'm not saying my TL is better than the current model - I'm just saying for $30,000 after trade in, I can't say that I'd have a car that impressed me. I much prefered the Lexus 350 which is more expensive. In the end though the Lexus only had a few features on this list and still didn't achieve all of them.

I admit, I forgot to check but I remember how I always felt slighted with all my cars because they came with a doughnut instead of a real spare. The dealers always say you can't fit a full spare time yet somehow every car I've owned I got odd sized wheel wells since I've always been able to fit a full spare in my tire well. Hopefully they are done with that nonsense and are spending the extra $3 (the cost difference for car manufacturer between a doughnut and a real tire) and giving us real spare tires. I never understand when you talk about spending tons of money on a car why they cheap out - particularly on a luxury car on the spare.

black label

^^^^
What about the "luxury" manufacturers who don't even give you a spare (Porsche, Audi, Mercedes, BMW)?

smarty666

Yeah, that is a bit ridiculous if you ask me! Apparently, you'll never get a flat tire in any of those automakers models

Pete2010

Nope, you just have to drive on their crappy runflats.

boe_d

I tried to think of what improvements the current TL has over my 2001 TL that I cared about

A. GPS
Pros Voice activated GPS and BT
Cons No more touch screen - no reason it couldn't have both a knob and touchscreen

B. Radio
Pros - better than my BOSE POS in my 2001 TL
Cons - speakers could be better. I custom installed my old radio on my Civic (1992) with decent speakers and the were clearer and fuller than the ones in the current 2010 TL.

C. Noise
Pros - better than my 2001 TL
Cons - still not nearly as good as the Lexus

Sadly those were the only things I could think of that were improvements that mattered to me over the 2001 TL.

One of the biggest negatives for me was looks - I would have been more likely to buy a new acura if it had the looks of the 2008 than the 2010.

The other biggest negative for me was fuel efficiency. I might have ignored the looks of the new acura if it got really good gas mileage but mediocre gas mileage and ugly design kept me from appreciating the 2010 Acura. I didn't expect it to have all 6 things I really wanted but looks and MPG were pretty significant. Things like it not having a cooled cup holder I can live without but it would be nice.

JM2010 SH-AWD

Or leather? Or Metallic paint? Yeah, the other cars all offer so much more.

ostrich

No, I don't think that you are putting down the 4G TL. It's just that the 4G TL does not satisfy your criteria, and I am not sure what car would, as a matter of fact. Good luck searching for your next car!

boe_d

I agree, not much satisfies my criteria - at least not at a price I can afford. The lexus 350 was much much closer to my wants than the Acura TL (at about $6K more). I'd have no problem with paying $6K or $10K more for a car that met those criteria. Unfortunately, the current 350 isn't very fuel efficient either. I know Lexus is working on making all of their cars hybrid shortly so who knows in a few years the 350 might be a good choice for me. I don't think I'm looking for alien technology - all of those things are in other cars - many of which are in even less expensive cars than the Acura. I'll just have to wait a bit longer for my next car as more fuel efficient powerful cars are still a couple of years off. I certainly wish the new BMW would be in a price I could afford but certainly not at my current income! 350HP, 60MPG - yeah, I could live with that if I had the money. I could however easily afford 250HP at 40MPG at $45K if Acura would step up to the plate - LOOK HERE I'm not towing a boat and law enforcement in CA is only too happy to try and get some income by giving out speeding tickets so I don't need something that goes 100MPH, I just need fast acceleration and to be able to punch it to 85MPH in an emergency.

I realize because of my fast acceleration and quick stops in LA my MPG will be much lower than peak efficiency but I'm really getting bad gas mileage as it is so a better engine would help. I don't expect to save money by getting a more fuel efficent car but not going to the gas station would be wonderful and yes, I'm sure gas prices will rise very shortly and by large amounts so who knows once gas is $6.00 a gallon which I expect in the next few years, it might help offset the initial purchase down the road and I keep my cars for a very long time but again - saving money on car vs. gas isn't the reason I want a more fuel efficient car.

jazzpicker

There are many more changes between the 01 and the 10 with having a trustworthy transmission being at the front of the line. The Tech package is great.
I've had both cars and think the 2010 is probably the best of the TL series cars I've ever had. They are different cars and can't be compared.

black label

Porsches don't come with run flats but they do supply you with a lovely can of Fix-a-flat. I believe it's the same deal with certain Audis. Mercedes and BMW sticks you with the run flat tires although Acura did the same on one version of the RL which had the run flats and no spare.

boe_d

As I said, there are plenty of differences. I listed the only differences that mattered to me. The 2010 has only been out a short while - in 2004 I thought my 2001 had a trustworthy transmission. After they recalled it, I found out otherwise - if I remember correctly they didn't recall it the same year it was released. I hope that the transmission they replaced my 2001 TL with after the recall is trustworthy.

I'm not saying people who like the 2010 TL are fools, other than the looks, it is a pretty nice car. What I am saying is that in a decade since my car was purchased, I would have hoped Acura had moved forward much more than they had in style, fuel efficiency etc. I don't expect them to change everything every year but an entire generation of tl has passed since I bought my car - the generation after my car, they improved the looks, the GPS had voice control, the radio was no longer BOSE (thank goodness) and to some degree the road noise insulation was improved. This new generation is a step back in terms of looks in my opinion, the road noise isn't that improved over the previous generation and the fuel efficiency really hasn't changed since my car. So while they have made some improvements since my 2001 TL, surely they've had time to make greater improvements. I'm guessing the model coming later this year won't be a big change but I'd be stunned if they don't improve the looks of the 2012 model and hopefully make some progress towards the other items on my list. My 2001 TL will hold me over until Acura improves a number of things or until Lexus improves their fuel efficiency - either one will be fine with me.

black label

^^^
I'll only comment on your fuel consumption concerns. You say they haven't improved the fuel economy since you 2001 TL but without a doubt they have increased HP. If they have increased HP but haven't hurt fuel economy, then they actually have done something fairly remarkable especially if you are comparing a 225 hp TL (rated under SAE standard J607 which by the current SAE standard J1349 would be closer to a 215 hp) to a 280 hp TL (which rated under the old standard would have hit 290-295 hp).

Along with the fact that the way hp is rated has changed and systematically lowered HP ratings since your 2001 TL was rated, the EPA has also changed the fuel economy testing which has lowered advertised fuel economy across the board as well. So not only is it harder for manufacturers to make hp, it is harder for then to achieve high fuel economy ratings as well. All the while Acura has maintained fuel economy while increasing hp.

I'm not saying your wrong about fuel economy but you definitely aren't telling the whole story. To keep fuel economy the same while adding 65 hp is quite a feat IMO.

boe_d

You are quite correct and follow what you are saying. I should have been much more specific. I wish they had improved the MPG at least 25% over my existing 2001 TL without decreasing performance. My 2001 is quite peppy but the mpg isn't great. I really think they have two markets - the type S who want a sportier engine and the others like me who aren't in a lot of high speed pursuits who can live with the old acceleration but would like much better fuel economy.

winstrolvtec

Black Label is 100% correct for those who may not know. As stated, new standards came into effect for both SAE and EPA but that does not mean cars lost power or fuel economy, it simply means they revised the way these numbers were obtained and had to change the ratings.

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/noframes/16734.shtml

In the link you find a good estimate of what the old EPA rating for the 2001 TL (for example) would look like now under the new ratings. As we can see the city and highway average is in line with the current FWD model TL and as we know it has a 3.5L and offers nearly 70 HP more instead.

If and when Acura adds the 6AT to the TL model it should not only improve real world gas mileage over all previous generations and models, instead of only keeping them consistent, but it should further distance the power and performance gap as well.

BWSmith201

I think this is definitely a possibility- the car is very masculine whereas earlier TLs, and Acuras in general, haven't been as much so. The new TL is very aggressively styled and the SH-AWD is pretty aggressive to drive. I find it much more attractive than the 2g, for example, because I like the aggressive style in a car. But, it might be hurting their business, since it's so dividing.

graphicguy

That was one of my very first impressions when my dealer had a private showing for the 4G rollout.....that it was one of the most masculine cars I had ever seen.

As far as comparisons to other brands and models it competes with, the TL may lag in a category here, or a category there, but overall it's either as good, or better across the board than the cars it competes with.

As far as the different generations of TLs, bottom line, the 4G is better in just about every way (this coming from a former 3G owner). IF you're looking for an ES 350, you're not going to be happy with a BMW or an Audi, etc. That's the TL's competition.

Lexus? If that's what you prefer, I hear some people like the Buick Lucerne. Maybe look at a Lincoln MKZ. Acura is going to handle better, with a firmer ride, than those kinds of cars.

MyCarIsntInMyWifesName

The TL is an upscale sedan with competitors being vehicles like the Maxima or MKZ, i.e. basically other gussied up family cars. It's not a BMW or Audi competitor.

I know the new 3G owners said the same thing when I got my 04 because of its new focus on performance and style, but it still isn't, sorry.

Unless I read that wrong.

BLEXV6

I too had an 02 TL, and I loved that car, but 4 tranny's, it's amazing I ever bought another Acura. That said, Honda came to the plate and fixed them, and provided a rental. I also got rid of it earlier than I wanted because I no longer trusted it's reliability.

The new TL is also the best car I have had, and I had 2 previous MDX's as well. They were bullet proof. I have to say the TL get's poor gas mileage. You would think that they would have te deactivating cylinders like the Accord.

Otherwise I love the TL.

compewterbleu

Not sure how the TL is being compared to a Max...a Lincoln, not sure about that even. Max's may aim at the TL, but their Nissan's. Upscale class; Lexus, Infiniti, Acura of the Japanese brands. Old guard, Honda, Nissa, Toyota...

IMO I see some 3G owners finding it hard to relate to the TL's new direction and that the TSX has supplanted it as the more popular Acura. That seems to be Acura's new marketing strategy to me.

The 4 G is just a better vehicle than the 3G. Plain and simple. The 5G should better than 4G...that's the product game. I choose my 01 3.2 CL over a Honda Prelude because the engineering focus was delivering a better vehicle. I usually research a vehicle for months before a purchase because it's a major investment with no financial return. Honda/Acura product seem to almost always be near the top. Could it be they have kept both product lines rather simple compared to most, maybe...does it hurt their sales numbers compared to other car lines, perhaps. Some say Toyota sold their soul to supplant GM....hmmm could be.

jeowen

alot of these comments regarding the 4G....> 3G reflects as if this is a support group thread. ie, first 2 sentences third paragraph above, its ok man, you gotta nice car

MyCarIsntInMyWifesName

To us enthusiasts they don't all three compete, but to the average buyer they are competitors. Few would team the TL up with BMW 3-Series or Mercedes C-Class (or even Audi A4).

Hard to relate because it's WRONG. I don't know why some 4G owners don't see this despite the market picking up and TL sales going in the shitter (compared to where the class is, anyway). I've said it before and I'll say it again: The TL was once one of the three sales giants among sedans in this price range (3-Series, TL, and ES). Now it's in the back of the pack.

So what does this suggest? The market doesn't like this new model as much.

Yes and no. It has updated features and more features, and there's the AWD, but that's about it. The packaging is worse, the interior is more plasticky, the styling went....yeah, the mileage is not improved, the FWD 4G drives sloppier than the 3G non-S, etc. Oh, but the 4G is a little quieter, and the FWD rides smoother.

Improvements? Yes. But it also has gone the wrong way in more than one area, and here's my real problem: whereas the 3G was immensely competitive when it was new in areas of style, performance, technology, etc., the new one is merely middle of the road.

Frankly your statement is not "plain and simple". It's actually rather debatable.