A while ago he said their moving to a four main car lineup. The MDX, RDX,TLX,ILX (NSX as the halo) and that he’s trying to strength their core lineup before adding any new cars, but they should add something below the RDX because the subcompact market is growing fast.

 

And at that time they were moving 70k+ TL’s and their lineup was larger than it is today. So I don’t see it happening either.

 

I spoke too soon. . . "Performance through marketing" has begun. . .

 

By far the best marketing material produced by Acura in ages.

This confirms that Acura isn’t slowing down and they have big plans. They know they have the potential of surpassing 200,000 in sales.

Acura is back with a bang!

 

Better trademark AcuraPro Tony before someone else does

 

 

Thanks brother. Feeling blessed!!

 

Still all advertising. They aint back till they show something real in steel with their street cars. Acura has made no dent back into the performance market since the G3 years. They need hardware not TV adds. The next TLX needs to be a 10 scale winner to make any real movement of the volume to 200,000 as most of the other product lines are pretty stable. They have plateaued the SUV's at about 5500-6500 units a month each & right now its a two truck business.

 

The only way they're hitting 200K units a year is by offering more crossovers. It doesn't matter how amazing the new TLX will be; there's not enough opportunity in the market for either conquest sales or incremental sales to make up the 50K gap that currently exists. People who care about performance is just a tiny slice of the market; there's a reason why Lexus sells so incredibly well even though their cars are so boring to drive.

 

Acura is back with a bang!

Sold 1,741 TLX's for September 2019

 

YTD sales of 112,813.

Going to barely exceed 150K at this rate.

Oct 2018 Acura division total sales was 13,511
Nov 2018 was 13,624
Dec 2018 was 14,053

 

Jon Ikeda and Michael Accavitti are delusional if they think parading around NSX images will boost Acura sales by 25% over the next few years. In fact, they have a REALLY difficult task cut out for them for four reasons, and they have zero chance for success if they plan on doing it through marketing.

• Acura has a smart customer base. They are intelligent by nature, hence, the reason they drive MDXs and TLXs. Smoke and mirrors through advertising ain't gonna work.
• Acura needs to right the miserable wrong they made with the 1G TLX. The 2G TLX has to be a hit to appeal to any new customers and give them a chance to draw back any loyalists they lost, if it's not too late.
• If they manage to get the TLX right, they still face competent rivals like Lexus, Audi, BMW and even Honda making more powerful, better handling, more comfortable, more technological, smoother (or all the above!!) cars. For God's sake, the Accord is on the 10Best list 33 straight years now, while BMW and Audi have been on it various times with various models the last 15 years.
• If they manage to get the TLX right, they have a beautiful performance sedan sitting in the showroom... right next to equally gorgeous RDX and MDX SUVs (which by the way have their own Aspec appearance trims). Try convincing young and middle aged men and women a sedan is better than an SUV to haul around their kids, work gear, campers, boats, etc.

 

You have took at the market. How many Q50 and IS are sold?
Acura’s lineup:
MDX 6 years old
TLX 5 years old
ILX god knows lol!

Infiniti cannot even sell 10K units per month. My point is if Acura succeed to produce more cars like RDX, they will
hit big numbers.

 

Those who will come and say Infiniti sells less than Acura due to high price. That argument is worthless. The incentives that Infiniti gives, even Mitsubishi doesn’t lol! Infiniti should sell like hot cakes. Acura went off track there is no doubt about it. But wait and see.

 

The problem is that even if they redesign the MDX so that it's on par with the RDX, the RDX is still going to be the volume seller for Acura. Forget the sedans, they can be amazing and they're still going to be dwarfed by crossover sales. The MDX has never really outsold the RDX, so at best they're looking at 2x RDX sales, which isn't enough to bump them up to 200K territory. Contrast that with Lexus, where the 6-year-old NX has sold almost as well as the new RDX, and the 5-year-old RX almost doubled that number. Tack on the extra sales from the new UX, the aging GX, and sprinkle on some LX, and you have huge sales numbers. There's just no way Acura can compete with that with only two crossovers in their lineup. Lexus has sold more crossovers and SUVs YTD than Acura has sold in all its vehicles combined, and unfortunately that's not changing anytime soon unless Acura expands its crossover lineup.

 

I am 100% with you. I think it requires more than just introducing the new mdx. I think Acura will achieve big numbers by introducing CDX, more of Type S, and redesign of ILX. At that point they may reach close to 180-200K.

I never compare Lexus to Acura. Frankly Lexus is in another level. They sell 300K units. Their reputation and image are way superior than Acura.

Infiniti and Acura won’t get there anytime soon. That I am fully aware of

 

I think the execs are still living in the 2000s where the TL moved 80K units per year. The problem is that they can build the most perfect TLX in the world and have it competitively priced, and it won't see anywhere close to those number because everyone is flocking towards crossovers. Practically speaking the only thing a sedan has over a crossover is that they tend to get slightly better gas mileage, and they handle better. That's it. Crossovers have more cargo capacity, more usable space, a smaller footprint because they're shorter, better visibility because you sit higher up, easier ingress and egress, you don't have to worry about scraping the bumper on driveways and curbs, better protection if you get hit by another taller vehicle, and longer suspension travel and ground clearance for soft-roading and snow. And that's not even getting to the subjective reasons people are gravitating to crossovers.

 

That or some sort of smaller MDX (maybe based on the Passport?). Up until the RX-L came out, the RX never really competed in the same space as the MDX because it's a smaller 5-seater, and I'm willing to bet the lion's share of RX sales is still dominated by the smaller version. Having a smaller, sportier version of the MDX would definitely fit the bill, and while it may cannibalize some of the RDX sales and some of the MDX sales, I'm willing to bet it'll also take away some of the sales from folks who aren't looking for a glorified minivan but are looking for something bigger than an RDX.

 

Said they were a two truck company & agree they need more product. Reason they need the TLX a 10 in performance is because of the stupid "Performance Through Marketing" approach the company adopted. You can't find a TLX TV or print add that not all performance all the time. They have no metal to back it up. They should be selling the car as a quality family car that does a lot of things well for a good price. The DOHC should bach up the image created by the adds. So far they have a V6 car that does not perform as well as a 4 cylinder 330.

In the 3 series BMW makes their money on the 4 Cylinder 330/430. They sell a lot of them. The 340/440 offer the non-M series performance to back up the "driving machine" nonsense but are actually a much smaller portion of the series sales.

If they could get the TLX to a steady 4000 units a month they would be at least half way to an 50,000 unit increase. The CR-V sells 25/30K units a month. Rebadge it run a Turbo 2.0L in place of the turbo 1.5L better interior materials & they should cover the shortfall with minimal development or production expenses.

One thing to remember though is the big cars are more profitable per unit then the little cars so they would need to sell more of them.

 

Even the 3G was nothing special....you could get a a powerful fast FWD sporty midsize sedan with a manual and LSD before Acura did and for slightly less money...the Nissan Maxima....during the 3G years you could get a very competent and very fast AWD MazdaSpeed 6 and even the FWD 3.0 V6 6 speed was no slouch.Heck, Ford managed to build a nice looking very fast manual midsize front driver with a lot of goodies back at the end of the 1980s with the Taurus SHO.
The 3G was simply very cute, that's all.

 

Guess thats why it out sold the BMW, MB,Audi & Infinity it was always tested against in all the magazines multicar tests. Never saw any other cars listed measured against the TL only the Germann cars & the Infinity. Later models tests have the small CADDY added in.

 

Simple, because Acura was a "premium" brand and it was compared with other premium/luxury brands....Nissan and Mazda are mainstream brands Probably Acura would not have approved such a comparo anyway. In the real world, starting with the 5th generation, the Maxima has always competed with the FWD TL and even the price was very close.

 

When my 05 tl got t-boned a couple years ago I got a brand new maxima as a loaner until I found a new car and I hated every minute of it. Nowhere near a 3rd gen tl in my eyes.

 

If you got t-boned couple of years ago it means you got a Maxima with a CVT...while I agree that the CVT is a real performance killer, on everything else a couple of years old Maxima would run circles around a G3 TL, especially a non Type S one....

 

This is the only article I could find in the current archive related to a premium brand comparo:
https://www.motortrend.com/cars/acur...-comparison-2/
I swear I remember reading stuff like TL vs ES vs A4 vs 3-series vs G35 back in the day. /shrug/

These marques are the typical high end cars. You won't find any Accords or Avalons or Maximas in these types of articles. Despite being similar in specifications, performance, comfort and technology, they are simply a different class. I'm not sure the point you're trying to make about Maximas being better than TLs. For one: the TL msrp was $33k base and the Maxima was $30k fully loaded. Different market. For two, if we open the TL up to any competition from outside its class, I would say the Legacy GT which also ran about $30k would beat the snot out of any car you can find, but that's simply not fair. That sedan (or wagon) was a wolf in sheep clothing throwing up numbers that approached the S4 (and almost the M3). Different market. No one was googling TL vs Maxima or TL vs Legacy back in 2006.

 

The 2 things I remember bothering me most about the maxima was the uncomfortable seats and the terrible handling. Seemed to have enough power for daily driving.

 

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...parison-tests/

 

Thanks for finding and posting this. Nostalgic to read. The first car I bought out of college was an A4 2.8 V6 Quattro with a manual. Man, that car felt solid, luxurious, smooth and fun to drive, but couldn’t beat a stock Integra in a race if I tried. Great car besides being an arm and leg to fix. All sorts of sensors and gizmos failed, which cost thousands every time. While I was shopping (actually the gen of vehicles prior to this article), I also considered an S40 and desperately wanted a 9-3 Viggen if I could have found one. Neither Volvo or Saab offered AWD and were in acquisition talks with Ford and GM back then, which were dealbreakers to me and elevated the A4 in my mind. Ive always known better than buying a Jag after my parents awful XJ Vanden Plas ownership experience. Rovers and Jags cost as much to own as they do to buy. I should have looked at a TL.

It’s neat to read how strongly Acura used to contend with this class back then. Read the adjectives C&D used. The TL sounded downright impressive and it finished third behind Infiniti and BMW. Wow. My how times have changed, where Acura is now a half a class below these marques and - despite all their Honda racing pedigree - the TLX is the best they can offer... the sedan that may kill Acura sedans. Meanwhile, they are busy making the MDX and RDX, which are arguably the best performing and certainly most reliable SUVs in their class. It’s like Acura threw in the towel with the TLX.

 

Perhaps I'm biased, but I honestly think the TLX is better than the 4G TL from the perspective of a luxury car. Some will disagree, but I think the combination of less NVH, a more solid chassis, and nicer materials makes it more like a Lexus than it does a BMW. The ZF9 issues notwithstanding, I think it's a better point A to point B car than the old car, but when we talk about performance rather than luxury it falls flat. Admittedly I haven't had as much seat time in a 4G TL as I would like, but I owned a 3G TL and in comparison it was loud, coarse, had rattles, felt hollow, and generally felt like a Honda with leather. Some would say it's more visceral or dynamic, which may be true as a driver, but people riding in it would probably say its cheap. In other words...it felt like an ILX (which is NOT a good thing mind you). Sure, it was fun to drive, no doubt, but it was on par with the Infiniti in the luxury department, which is to say, it was a step behind Lexus, MB, Audi, BMW.

 

I probably should have but never did have a 3G or 4G TL, so I’m nowhere near qualified to compare to a TLX. All I know is what my neighbors and friends with 4G TLs say, which is that it’s a great car: solid, quiet, comfortable and performance oriented, albeit looks like a spaceship. I tend to agree with a lot of what you say on this forum, so I totally believe you about Acuras interior quality improvements over time, I think people use “road feedback” or “dynamic to drive” in place of “cheap” sometimes. My WRX was great at giving “road feedback” because it was an unrefined, squeaky, rattle-y car.

I never hated my TLX outward quality or luxury. I mean, it seemed to be assembled well, composed and moderately fun to drive while I owned it, but the transmission was clearly a distracting defect and the reliability was poor enough to require multiple dealer trips. After driving my GS 350, my TLX comparatively was an unrefined tin can of squeaks and rattles. But that may have just been mine. Like you said, Acura is more like a Honda with leather than a luxury brand. I think that shows through when you drive a TLX for a while, then jump into a GS or 3 or A4. Heck, my TSX felt tighter and less noisy than my TLX.

 

Very few 4G owners would agree other than the fact the TLX is quieter....the TL feels more solid and substantial, tighter on the road, (4G SH-AWD handles way better than a TLX SH-AWD) cabin materials and construction is significantly better than the TLX. Many 4G owners, even on this forum, moved to other brands. Popular "destinations" were Audi (many of them), Lexus GS, some MB, BMW and Infiniti here and there and even few Dodge Charger V8. For many of them the TLX could not cut it as an upgrade from a 4G...it did work for previous TSX owners.

 

Sorry that this is my first post but, just joined this forum just to say tony does have a point, that we have to look at similar sedans for comparison, not sure exactly on why Q50s do better, but bottom line is that Q50 has sold roughly 30K more Q50s than TLXs from 2014 through 2018

I found some info from US Car Sales Data - carsalesbase.com

Q50
2018 34.763
2017 40.739
2016 44.007
2015 43.874
2014 36.899

Total - 200282

TLX
2018 30.468
2017 34.846
2016 37.156
2015 47.080
2014 19.127

Total - 168677

-----------------------------

Infiniti sold 31605 more Q50s than Acura's TLX during these years.

I'm pretty sure I represent a very small group of individuals in the sedan market, but I have several prerequisites for Luxury Performance:
1. Perfer a Manual Trans (No Sedans Left in the Market, all used now)
2. Cars that Teeny Bopper Teens can't really get a hold of (meaning I will pay a premium so I'm not categorized in the same statistical family).
3. Some high HP awesome luxury performance sedan for just some plain ol "Status" for events (BMW M or Audi RS) - Maybe this prerequisite sits higher for a bulk of individuals cause BMW 5 Series just dominates this mid-size sedan category.

I happen to also have several prerequisites for a Daily
1. Manual a must, for maximum reliability
2. A little more Discrete than your typical Civic Type R look

I love Acuras and Hondas, have Phoenix 00 ITR with 44K miles for almost 20 years now, currently drive a 2017 Honda Accord EX Manual 6 Speed for my daily, and I been waiting for another Manual Miracle Luxury Sedan that isnt a BMW, and I'm dreaming that Acura does a miracle with this Type S and Manual.

Lets face reality, Manuals are dead, outside of a daily driver, my demographic age group appears to only have interests in high HP vehicles. Maybe I should just go to the dark side and go discrete american muscle with a ctsv? lol

Only time will tell but long story short, I personally hope "Acura is Back"

 

The Q50 is far from being perfect but it is head and shoulder better than the TLX pretty much on every level (fit and finish, luxury features, tech, performance), it is a proper premium sport sedan where the TLX it is not....some die hard Acura fans have issues admitting it.

 

Welcome to the forum. Nice first post. I hemmed and hawed over posting this link I found yesterday:
MY16 TLX Market Position and Demographics ? Acura Launch Training

I found it VERY interesting how well they pegged me and my demographic as a TLX driver. Upper 30s, male, married (w/ kids), HHI in $130s. Okay, good start. Even some of my personality traits were spot on. Professional (engineer), risk takier (extremely aggressive with stock portfolio), sports fan, outdoor lover (own a travel trailer), work hard, value free time (as in, not spending time at or driving to dealer for repairs), yada yada. I bet most of us here are white males, most younger than old, most intelligent, most married, with respectable incomes. Okay, now I'm impressed.

But that was short lived when I realized what the TLX actually was. Now that I'm removed from it, I can be more impartial about the looks (without a body kit, it's pretty bland and the beak was not attractive), it was boring to drive despite SH-AWD because of the ZF9, and the tech didn't really work for me (wacky wipers, LKAS dropouts, useless LSF and long ACC distance). So while they nailed me, the TLX completely under-delivered. Even now when I see TLX Aspecs, which I used to say are the best looking cars on the road, there are honestly way better ones... G70, Stinger, Accord.

Along comes your post. I used to be like you. Hell bent on a manual, which got harder and harder to find, and eventually only available in stripped down models. Plus I grew up and have a daily drive in traffic that I don't want to shift every mile of every day. What I want is a toy with stick that I can drop the top and drive on the open road all weekend. I agree that I don't want a car that I see high schoolers driving around. I agree that I prefer a sleeper to an STI or Evo that sticks out like a race car.

So to your post, Acura completely, unquestionably understands you, me and their entire demographic. They did back when they launched the 1G TLX and look what they delivered. Eek. Now we have to wait and see what they cook up with the 2G TLX. Honestly, I would manage your expectations and hopes. I highly doubt the base TLX will be anything close to an A4 or G70 and I'll believe a 350-400hp manual AWD Type S when I see it. It's not like a Type S will ever dethrone the BMW M anyway if you really want the ultimate performance and luxury. You would be better off with an Audi, Lexus, BMW or Mercedes to suit your needs. Or Genesis. Or Honda.

 

Or Cadillac. Or Alfa. Or Infiniti.

Meanwhile, I sit here listening to NPR and just heard a story about Volvo rolling out its first EV and how they expect half of their cars (not sure if that means offerings or total sales, I can't rewind and didn't catch which they meant) to be EVs.

I wonder how much of my demographic are interested in an EV. Two of my young, white male engineer coworkers already drive Teslas. An EV would completely fit my needs as a daily driver and I already plan on an EV as my next sedan. My plan would be for our other family SUV in the garage to be an ICE for road trips and towing.

So when is Acura going to work on that? Competing with Volvo, Lexus and BMW on the EV front? If they're falling behind in the premium segment, maybe they could focus on that direction and get a head start or leg up. Any bets on how many TLXe would sell versus TLX Type S? It's like there isn't a single person at Acura with a vision for anything except building good looking and reliable RDXs and MDXs.

 

Baller Engineers you got there, I wish I can afford a Tesla for 1 Million Miles, I have had hybirds for the longest time and todays car batteries just can't handle severe temperatures in terms of longevity. Sure these things can last 500K in Cali, but Midwest and Northern Temps, I would say, regardless of Mileage, barely lasts 10 years in sub temps. Once these batteries are out of warranty (I believe teslas are something like around 150K or 8 years maybe more but regardless), as they degrade substantially in harsh temp environments such as those in the midwest, car battery prices will show their true colors. I've learned my lesson on hybrids and couldnt justify anywhere from 2-7k for a simple honda hybrid battery, let alone roughly 24 Grand every 10+ years on a Tesla. When I was actively looking at Tesla, I knew these batteries wont last in harsh temps and was researching battery prices forever. the most recent quote Ive seen online was roughly 24K for a Model S60. LoL no way I can afford anywhere from 70 to 150 grand in batteries to get to one Million at 30K miles a year. ROI happens pretty quick in Teslas (within 5 years), but not so true to get to 1 Million apparently. I dont plan on trading my cars anymore, and I hope to get to a Million some day in one of these 2 Manual cars (Forester and Accord). I will from this point on just add to the stable, just done with cars cause manuals are gone. =(

So without going too much more, I'm no longer in the market for an EV unless im a baller and/or when these batteries comes down to several hundred bucks for replacements. =)

@someguy11 And in regards to your other post,
I'm Glad we're on the same page, maybe our demographics is larger than we expect it to be, I aint no baller like you, I'm barely making over six figs, but man with inflation, kids, mortgage, student loans, retirement, investments, hobbies, and the spouse, I swear, 100K Salary today is the new 60K, and it just plain ol sucks. At this rate, Despite with the public says about Model 3s, Teslas are becoming more and more now out of reach, just like any other exotics.

 

Amen to this. Despite whatever bracket the government or economist calls me - lower-middle class, middle or upper-middle class - it feels like an endless battle to live our lifestyle while at the same time covering kids activities, presents/gifts, liquid savings, retirement, kids' college AND vacation/fun money fund. I promise I'm no baller. We live modestly, dine out little, and don't even pretend to be frivolous. $100k+ doesn't feel like enough for everything.

My coworkers aren't ballers either. I don't personally know anyone who drives a $60-110k S or X. Both those Teslas are $40k base-ish Model 3s that they pre-ordered and waited for. And I know from talking with one of them how bad it is in winter for two reasons. He says a) it's awful to drive in snow and b) his range is reduced by like 50% when running the heater, which makes sense that no engine means no heat means the onus for heat is on the battery. Yikes is that a lot of load/draw on top of driving the car. Battery life is TBD, but I'd be impressed with 6-8 years. So all the gas and oil saved over that span has to be subtracted from the electricity and the replacement battery for the net cost benefit.

I wouldn't buy a Tesla. I would wait until the mainstream makers enter the space and start driving down battery costs while improving battery performance. Let the Bolt, Leaf and i3 pave the way for future EVs that perform better (and quite honestly, aren't so fugly). The only thing Tesla has on those are Autopilot and how much better looking they are.

 

You couldn't be more wrong. I really wanted to get Red Spot but after test driving it I was majorly disappointed. The head unit is an apsolute joke, laggy as hell. Yes, interior is more premium but it rattled a lot when I pushed the car. TLX is less premium but feels tight and well fitted. The car is fast but the steering and handling is a joke. Transmission also has issues not as bad as ZF though. I can honestly tell you Q50 is not a lot better but to each his own.

 

Many of us may all agree with you 1000%, but unfortunately the extra 31 thousand extra Q50s sold over the years over the TLX says otherwise. =(

 

The TLX didn't go on sale until August 2014. If I recall, the Q50 started selling in 2013. That alone may account for much of the 17k difference in 2014 alone. There was also a stop sale for the TLX somewhere around the end of December 2014 that could account for some of that 2014 difference, too. The numbers aren't really that far apart, tbh. They both had shaky releases with issues.