n-spring

I'd like to know what Honda is up to; they've asked for another extension on filing documents for the "Acura TLX" trademark. They asked for the first extension back in October. Each extension is good for six months. The second extension was granted on Tuesday, April 2.

http://trademarks.justia.com/854/50/...-85450249.html

Ken1997TL

It means the TLX has been delayed while they build a better car.

JT4

One can only hope..

KeithL

It means I am likely not coming back to Acura as they fumble through their identity crisis.

09tl3.7

perfection is near.
i was told that Acura is gonna introduce a complete new line up for the Tl. ie coupe and conv. not sure if its true but who knows

Treblig

I guess that means that I'll be holding on to my '12 a little longer....

BEAR-AvHistory

You don't need the car to trademark the badge. Maybe they are having a conflict with another TLX trademark holder.

KeithL

Well that was great planning on their part. They really need a naming convention that makes some sense.

i_love_cars

iTrader: (1)

+1

g37guy01

That would really throw the established players into a tailspin.

jmsmiff

I heard they were gonna reinstate the Type S for the 2014 line up. Now I'm thinking that may not happen

weather

...the suspense is killing me! I am so eager to see the first spy pics of the TLX!

KeithL

I am kind of getting worn out with the waiting. Maybe I will regret it, but I am about 90% given up. If the TLX is too conservative then I think I am gone. The 3G was nice, even the initial 4G would be nice if the huger chrome beak had been toned down, I did not mind the pointed front, just the obnoxious beak. When I see the original 4G compared to the MMC I prefer the original if the beak is swapped out or painted or something to lessen the focus on it. I still think the MMC is nice, but the car is just blended in now. I really want to come back.

Rocketsfan

Weren't the first spy pics of the 4G around August 2007, and the car went on sale around September 2008?

KeithL

I'm actually beginning to think the TLX won't go on sale until summer 2014 as a 15. True we still have plenty of time, but really I think we should have seen a mule or camo spy shot or something by now. They started showing the RLX by now. Once the Q50, IS and CTS go on sale they need to get either some spy shots leaked or a prototype shown so people can at least decide if they want to wait.

dwest1023

Im sure Acura wants to get the TLX right. They know the TLX is the mustard on a hotdog. Based on the RLX and MDX I think we know how the interior will be. Im looking for more conservative exterior with no dual exhaust tips. Having said this, Im feeling dissappointed already.

JT4

I tend to agree that the styling is going to be on the conservative side. I happen to be in the minority since I liked the original 4G styling, I never found it offensive and I liked the fact that it was aggressive and didn’t look like anything else on the road. I also liked the “in your face grill”.

IMO the MMC in 2012 toned down the in your face aggressiveness slightly which in turn made it look more refined so to appeal to the masses.

The problem was that the TL was already 3 years into the 4G and people had gone elsewhere.

I think that if the 2012 styling was originally introduced in 2009 Acura would have sold a lot more TL’s than they did. Although it didn’t bother me, the “beak” obviously turned off a lot of people and this is why I think Acura is going to go very conservative on the 5G.

weather

I hate mustard on Hot Dogs.....That already starts things bad for me

With yours second statement...I want to stay positive but until I see a prototype, I am leaning like you as well

LawnPro

Well I am going to think positive - and say the TLX will be a homerun!
Acura has had lots of time to improve it, ..........right?

They want to get back 3G TL sales numbers.

Mr Marco

A convertable? You have got to be fucking with us. Where did you hear this? Can you give us a link?

Pascal Type-S

Haven't been on this forum in a long time. Hi everybody. I tend to agree with KeithL that at this point the TLX will be introduced early next year as a 2015. Usually a full-model refresh is introduced early in the year. Everyone on this thread has google'd 2014 TLX several times and we can't even find a mule. It's odd because the TL(x) usually comes out a model year after the Accord is redesigned. Oh well, that gives you time to pay off your current ride if you haven't already.

C8N

My car was making some grinding noises and took my car in for service last week and I was able to spend some time with the service manager to analyze where the noise was coming from.

Anyway, what he told me was that the TLX is actually a replacement for the TSX and will be introduced as a '15 MY. He also said that here was no mention of a replacement for the TL. He further said that there has been no announcement for an AWD version of the TLX and that is not to say that Acura has no plans for it.

If what he said was true it's funny that RLX replaced the RL and TLX replaces a TSX? Doesn't make sense to me. Basically, what I got out of this is that information is different depending on who you ask. Unless you get a hold of some big shots at Acura, your guess is as good as anyone else's at this point as for the replacement for the TL.

KeithL

The TLX is supposed to replace the TSX and TL. The current TSX is based on the global Accord platform while the TL is based on the NA Accord platform. The ILX was brought out to fill the low end as the TSX was moving up in price. I suspect the ILX gets some minor emergency overhauls (a la Civic) with a bigger engine in the higher end models and maybe a few more features. Unfortunately the features they need to be competitive, such as LED DRLs, LED tails, etc they will not likely add. The TLX will likely start where the TSX Tech is priced today and run up through the TL range possibly into the low $50K range. The questions are what will it offer. At this point there are a few theories. One is it is on plan just running late due to the tsunami delaying things in general so it will be a killer car. The other theory is maybe the went back to the drawing board after ILX stalled and need to tweak some things across the lineup.

Either way Acura has no choice but to offer a TLX that offers all the tech of the RLX in at least one model. If you look at the Q50, 14 IS and new CTS they will all offer compelling tech in cars that will be in the $50K price point. If Acura holds all the goodies out for the RLX then they might as well discontinue their car line now and save the money. If they leave out AWD then they will be competing with Accords, and Avalons and Maximas since anyone that want AWD and performance will go with CTS, Q50 or IS, not to mention the obvious German choices.

NwTSXmt

service manager...really...lmmfao...ok

JM2010 SH-AWD

There have been 8th Gen Accords running around in Japan with the 3.5 FWD DI set up and with the 3.5/Hybrid/AWD setup that is going into the RLX. If those are going to be TLX drivelines too, then they have already been thoroughly vetted. Being the owner of a '13 Accord (4 cyl/MT), I feel pretty safe in thinking that the new TLX (assuming V6 power and AWD) will be an excellent vehicle.

weather

...all I can say is that if Acura removes the SH-AWD from the TLX, that will be the kiss of death and the demise of the brand! There is no way that they would be stupid enough to only make the the MDX with the SH-AWD (while the RLX has the SH-SH-AWD).

...and if they are stupid enough to do this, then honestly, I hope they go bankrupt and they will deserve every single penny they will lose.

You know, its one thing to hold your cards close to your chest and built the excitement about cars but when they disappoint, and instead of bring excitement, they pump out excrement, that is why many of us are getting a bit frustrated with Acura these days. I know I am not that important to Acura, I am just a guy and only bought 4 of them, however, collectively, we all make a difference to the brand.

They hit a home run with the RDX and I know they have it in them.....why couldn't they do it with the RLX? And even the MDX, sure the MDX is nice on the interior and the exterior styling is similar to the old one but they took away the features that made it looks sporty...the fog lights and the rear dual exhausts. I dunno....I want to think they know how to hit a home run, but almost would rather hit a bunt and be safe?!

KeithL

^^^
4 is more than most customers that bounce brand to brand, I had 6 in 5 years and if you add in the gf's CRV then RDX and TSX we bought 9 Honda products in 6 years. A least she will likely move to a new Accord next year, but I will likely stay Infiniti or if the CTS makes it in time, may try that.

Not sure I agree the RDX is a home run, to me a solid triple, price is what makes it a hit, features wise I am afraid the RDX will age quickly compared to competition.

weather

^^ I'll be anxiously wait to see what you will be doing. You and I (as with dwest) seem to share many of the same point and are drawn to the same cars so I am eager to see how you will go. I love the new CTS (at least in pics) too and right now, is on my "potential" list. I have an advantage that my lease is not due this summer/fall so I can ride this out and really make a decision once I have all the facts but quite honestly, my gut tells me we are going to be disappointed. I am hoping to be wrong on this one but I was told the TLX is going to have similar styling cues from the RLX (only smaller). If they give me a decent body kit to slap on, great looking wheels and don't remove the SH-AWD, I will likely stay.

KeithL

Well if you are betting I would start putting money on another M. If I go M I will be ordering it by June since it takes 4 months to get.

weather

*lol* I seem to be thinking you will drop the money on a caddy! Not sure why but my gut feeling tells me that when it hits the showroom, you will want one. I think the M hasn't changed enough and that in the end, you will want something different, something RWD etc....and that you will try the Caddy. I could be wrong, but I am just as anxious to see how you will go as seeing the RLX

...and for the RDX, I think that for the price and the segment its it, it offers a great package. I am in the minority that think that the RDX did not really need the SH-AWD (and I know I am the exception here) but that is simply my opinion. The styling is great for an suv/cuv, the price is good although I agree that some features are missing...hopefully next years model will correct these shortcomings

KeithL

Could be, but CTS will probably not hit before I need to order my M. And even though M has not changed much I will be ordering it with Tech package so there will be enough new things in it for me, and I just love the ride. I am skeptical of GM and unless they beefed up CUE it will be laggy and reviews of CUE in the ATS complain the screen is a finger print magnet.

n-spring

I too am in this same boat. I find both the 2014 Q50 and CTS very appealing on first glance. The lease on my 2012 TL matures in June 2014. But I'm beginning to look at things a little differently these days. I ask myself why I'm paying a premium for an Acura and would continue to do so for an Infiniti or Cadillac, when I can get the same tech in a Honda Accord, Nissan Altima, or Mazda 6. I think the only thing I'd really miss is the ELS sound system.

KeithL

^^^
Excellent points and one I have with the gf all the time. She is tight on cash, but loves Acura and her TSX. I tell here for a little less she can get an Accord Touring with more goodies that Acura and a V6 that will outperform and get better MPG than her TSX She could care less about Audio so for her she is still clinging on to the dealer experience which has been great with Acura. I tell her she can get the car maintained at Acura, just that warranty items need to go to Honda dealer. The low end luxury market will have some real issues int he next 3-4 years as all this tech moves into Sentras and Accords.

For me I still enjoy the better audio system and finer materials inside, the leather in the AWD TL or my M is far superior to what is in an Accord and I love buttery smooth and soft leather. You can argue warranty is better, but you can get a 7/100K warranty form Honda on an Accord for $1K or so.

I was thinking of an Accord Touring for myself for a year or so and was close. Went to a sound guy and he said for $1500-$2500 he could do amps and speakers that would make the Accord sound better than the ELS in Acura, so you do that and add a $1K warranty and you have a sweet ride.

weather

There is always an argument for buying a cheaper car....When one buys an Acura, a Lexus, a BMW or an AUDI, one knows he/she is not buy a requirement but rather, a desire or passion. The car companies knows that some people out there are buying an emotion (although that seems to be lacking with Acura these days)....so I agree that dollar for dollar, a Honda is a better investment than an Acura but the same could be said about most things in life. Why does one pay for Heinz when there is a generic brand that tastes just as good, why would one buy the brand "Bench" or Lullulemon when they can get something cheaper....For the record, I am NOT discouraging any females from wearing lullulemon, in fact, I am endorsing the brand!! *lol* Best thing that ever came out of Canada except Tim Horton :0)

n-spring

You make a fair comparison between store brands and name brands. There are certain cases where I always buy the store brand if it's available. I find that there's really no difference between a can of whole kernel corn labeled Del Monte and one labeled Kroger. But in some cases, I stick with name brands because they are simply better. Tide laundry detergent is one of those.

In the case of "luxury" cars and "mass market" cars, the characteristics of what makes one car more "luxurious" over the other is the badge. You might argue that the interior materials used to construct the car are of a higher quality, but is that worth the premium of $10K to $20K? That is left up to subjectivity in the mind of the consumer. If you're buying on a purely emotional basis, I can understand that, and in some cases, the snob appeal is a factor in that decision. In the end, the luxury car you purchase is no different from the mass market car that will move you from Point A to Point B. It all boils down to what's important to you, the consumer. At this point in my life (I'm 52), practicality is beginning to trump emotion more and more often. I would imagine a majority of people make a decision of what car to purchase based mostly on practicality. How else would you explain the sales success of the Toyota Camry, a car that is continuously derided by the automotive press as an "appliance"?

KeithL

^^^
One also needs to remember that also in a luxury line of cars you expect better service, warranty, etc. That comes at a cost, as do the expected loaner cars. One thing that turned me off about Hyundai was that their Genesis loaner program was at the purchasing dealer only (at least back in 2010). I can go to any Infiniti dealer and get my car serviced and get a loaner, same with the gf's Acura.

JM2010 SH-AWD

Right. We own an Accord and we own our Acura. The Accord is a great family sedan. But the experiences (both buying and service) are quite different between the two dealerships (and we like both our dealers).

xenonhid

+2



Felt this way since 2009 when they rolled out with their Power Rangers Plenum Grill.

BEAR-AvHistory

Affordability. the Camry is a nice car priced so that with a good selection of options including a V6 it sits at or below the price of the average new car sold in the US. A big chunk of the public buying a new car can afford one. By comparison a luxury item by definition is a non necessity item worth what people are willing to pay for it.

It’s the same old same old difference between necessity vs. luxury. If the average square footage of a house in the US is 2200sqft does anyone “need” an 8000sqft house.

Right now the TL is trapped in no-mans land. Its priced above the average but is not generally perceived a luxury brand so the sales are not there. When it was the undisputed bang for the buck car it sold like hotcakes. I think this caused the marketing guys to think they could step up to a true luxury item but the cache’ was not there to carry it off. Sales tanked from the get go & never recovered. They stayed flat between 30/35K per year about 50% off the prior version.


Its really hard to figure out what the game plan is or if there is a game plan. At one end you have a reskinned Civic, ILX, for $26K base or about $2K more than a base Camry. At the other end you have a reskinned Accord, RLX, for a possible $70K+ that will go up against the top Euro, Asian upper product lines & specialty cars like the CTS-V. The $50K FWD RLX is competing with the Euro & Asian’s 3rd level cars like the 5 & E as well as the second level Cadillac's.

Finally the hole in the donut the great middle ground that the TL’s successor the TLX will have to fill. My gut feel is the various lines pricing is spread out way to far without enough product differentiation to fill the gaps.

KeithL

Funny when I see 09-11 TL on road I like it, except for the plenum. The line did not bother me, if they had put the current plenum on the 4G day one it might have been better accepted. While the 12-13 is still nice they took an over all bold style and muted its nose and tail. I can't wait to see the C concept later this week to see if it gives us strong hint at TLX.