George Knighton

They went from the edgy to the boring. Although I don't especially like the looks of the 4G TL, I believe that I like the 2009-2011 look more than the 2012-2014 facelift look, which is just too...normal.

People react to the 2014 RLX the same way. It's just...normal and boring looking, and the model that's originally available to us is not very "Advanced" with the technology, either.

Yesterday I found myself shopping a silver 2013 ZDX.



47,000 plus tax. And they were going to give me 21,500 for my TL even with 80K miles on the clock.

I'm still thinking about it but I believe I woke up this morning thinking that I already owned the best of that generation of Acuras and I'll probably not go through with it.

Although I don't think they're good looking, I associate a look of good things and good times with that generation of Acura's "Advance" look. They wanted to make a statement...and they sure as hell did make a statement.

It might say something for the looks of them that it seems to me the original 4G TL is more popular now that they've stopped making them.

Maybe Acura was just a little too far Advanced, just a couple of years ahead of the marketing mindset of the people in general.

What's done is done. You got it or you didn't.

As far as the 2015 TLX is concerned it might be a good sign that some people are openly reporting 370 HP for the RLX Hybrid SH-AWD.

If that same drivetrain goes into the TLX, we might have something decent on our hands even if we are forced to buy an automated manual instead of a clutch.

:-)

boe_d

OK - search through the forums - you'll find the phrase FUGLY used quite often. In my opinion I equate that to being the same as ugly as sin.

The beak is just a portion of the crumpled tin can design of the 4GL and the front grill is still ugly and yes that is my opinion - shared by all of my friends and the consumers who are NOT buying the TL.

As for the pricing on the hybrid accord yes, it has been announced $36k for non plugin and $40k for the plugin.

RosieQ

Do you have a link for non plugin hybrid pricing? I can't seem to find that 36k figure.

HeartTLs

iTrader: (5)

I wonder what's going on with the ZF 9HP? I had high hopes that Honda would use it in future Acuras but there's been no recent news if Honda bought the rights to it.

TeamAcura

I don't think it's the styling for Acura. They've tried the bold approach and the conservative approach with the same results. For example, the 09-12 RL to the now "bland" RLX . People will complain either way. But it's really the name brand that sells, IMO I think the current bimmers look bland as heck. Nothing really sticks out at you. They all look the same but they are still selling well because of brand recognition. Same goes for Audi and MB. However, I do like the approach Lexus is taking with their spindle grill and overall design. It's controversal but it still sells because of its' branding. I know I'm in the minority but I'm hoping Acura does not go conservative (which I doubt) with the TLX and really push the design limits as they did the 4G. I think it will be more welcoming this time around.

Also, they need to stick to models and not add or drop one every dang time. It hurts their image and this is another reason why they are not doing so well. It's like they are confused and confusing people. That will turn off a lot of potential constumers. Consumers will not take Acura seriously as a competitor to other brands when cross shopping.

boe_d

I'll see what I can find. You are right they mention the price of the plug in hybrid in many articles but not the standard (non plugin) hybrid. Someone on this forum told me $36 and that seems probable based on the price of the plugin.
http://www.caranddriver.com/news/201...-and-info-news

KeithL

I think the RL design hurt it once the 4G TL came out. The 4G TL looked bigger than an RL due to the RL curves. I think Acura needs to find a styling design and stick with it, then they need cars that inspire people, and they need a good value statement. The RLX is priced too close to its competitors to send the value message.

JT4

I agree, I have heard many comments made about the direction of Acura styling/design but I have never heard it described as "ugly as sin".

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but "ugly as sin" should be used when describing a Pontiac Aztek not an Acura.

boe_d

Please do a quick search on this forum for the word FUGLY- sorry if I took the liberty of using a phrase with the same meaning but not the exact wordage.

boe_d

There are over 90 threads and 480 posts with the word FUGLY to describe this car and that is just in this forum. I'm sure you'll find other great descriptions such as HIDEOUS, UGLY, REPULSIVE, GHASTLY, GROTESQUE, REVOLTING etc. if you think fugly is too narrow a scope.

In the future, I will try to stick with accepted term FUGLY as "ugly as sin" seems to have ruffled some feathers.

JT4

I’m the first one to admit that I’m too lazy to do a search. So if you want to do it and tell us how many posts mentioned Acura styling as “fugly” knock yourself out.

Then if you want take the total amount of forum members and do the math to get a percentage of how many people think that Acura’s are "fugly". I bet it’s a small amount.

And let’s not forget that forums in general are usually a very small percentage of the total market so whatever percentage you come up with, it’s even smaller.

It really doesn't matter to me if you or anyone else thinks Acura's are "ugly as sin" or "fugly" that is your opinion and you're entitled to it. If 50% (I know I'm exaggerating) of the forum members think the TL is "fugly" and I like it I'm buying it anyway.

As I said, I personally have never heard anyone refer to Acura vehicles as “ugly as sin”..

JT4

Thanks for the info. So out of 12,017,580 posts on this forum 480 of were in reference to Acura styling as “fugly” or whatever the word of the days was. So this is approx 0.00004%. And out of a total of 647,759 threads, 90 of them were in reference to Acura styling as “fugly", approx 0.00014%.

Just as I thought a very small percentage, I guess I can keep my Acura a little longer, or at least until someone tells me it's repulsive then it's gone.

hadokenuh

Just want to chime in - Then there is nothing to argue about because even you personally have never heard that, doesn't mean it doesn't happen. It's just a matter of opinion. Some like the design, some don't. Enjoy your TL

I have a 2013 TL. Some of my friends think it's ugly. I don't bother to explain or say anything back. If it works for you, it works for you. Now back to the topic!

JT4

I never said it didn't happen or wasn't said and I agree with you in that if it works for me that's all that matters.

As I mentioned in one of my posts it really doesn't bother me who likes it or who doesn't like it. But IMO I just thought that calling it "ugly as sin" was a little over the top.

And BTW I don't consider this arguing.

boe_d

I find your lack of math, statistic and logic application concerning

There are only so many threads devoted to the 4G this website discusses many more vehicles than the 4G TL- does someone in the 3G thread have to say at the end of each post - btw, the 4G is fugly.

Why would every post mention their post mention the style of the 4g.
Q. Hey I have a fugly 4G TL and I need to turn off the maintenance light.
A. OK - while sitting in your fugly 4G TL - press...

If this forum is about the 4G TL - don't you think many people in this particular forum own 4Gs and do you think they would say - I just bought a new 4G TL and boy it is fugly...

Furthermore you did the math on ONE term - FUGLY - you didn't include grotesque, hideous etc.

As hadokenuh, if you like the 4G TL - that is great! If you own one you really should love it and enjoy it! I don't appreciate modern art and neither does the majority of the population but there are plenty of people who do appreciate it. Just not enough to make it as sought after as classic art. The discussion had moved on to why the 4G TL is not selling well and why people think the TLX will replace the TL name. I think the style was a big factor as I still consider the quality pretty good. You are welcome to disagree and say the quality has gone down hill or the price has gone up to much or the competition has gotten better - whatever you like. My guess is the style but that is just my opinion.

To be clear, I have a 2001 TL and it is VERY average looking and I still love it. If I could trade it for a 4G TL as an even swap, I would in a heartbeat, the 4G has many many many advantages over my old TL (which again, I still love). I think the 3G was the best exterior look so far but I found the roof was a little low on the windshield for my likes as I'm reasonably tall but certainly no basketball player.

JT4

Thanks for letting me know that here on AZ more is discussed than just the 4G.

I really find it really funny that you question my logic when you’re the one hanging out in the 4G forum even though you find them Fugly, grotesque, hideous etc. And then go onto say that you would trade your 2001 TL for a 4G.

And I'm not logical??

docboy

Agreed.

The 4G TL's exterior design is FAR ahead of conventional design, and definitely not designed with the mainstreamed population in mind. It's polarizing, bold or too bold depending how you look at it, and definitely makes a unique statement. Internet naysayers will of course claim the world is falling apart b/c of it.

IMHO, the 4G TL's design, at least 09-11 preMMC, will really stand the test of time, obnoxious beak and all. Even 4 years later, my 2010 TL-6MT still stands out, appears fresh, has an aggressive unique appearance, and does not appear to have aged. Contrast that to the 2010 A4 and G37 . In my eyes they appear bland and sedated.

Is the 4G TL design "ugly?" IMHO no. Is it "good looking?" No. Is it "bold and unique?" Yes, as there is nothing out there like it.

Compared the TL's design to a Lamborghini or Audi R8 or the X6. The Lambo or R8 or X6 IMHO is also not a "good looking car" or "beautiful" car by any means. It's not an "ugly looking car." But they are also bold, unique, and has a badge and name cachet to withstand public criticism. Perhaps all Acura is missing is that snob appeal.

boe_d

Let me know where the TLX forum is and I'll be happy to hang out there. I guess I'm not being clear - yes, I find the 4G hideous and I find my older TL bland. The discussion was on the reason the TL was dying off - does the fact that you like your 4G change that in some way?

jbond2099

iTrader: (1)

cool story bro

BEAR-AvHistory

About plug in's - Ecotality Inc. the company that makes charging stations went bankrupt today.

weather

^^ I guess someone pulled the plug *lol*

Rocketsfan

The RL/RLX are terrible values. The RL was the "flagship" that really wasn't - the TL was probably a better buy at a cheaper price. The RLX is just grossly overpriced, as well as a bit bland, although I think its blandness is exaggerated by some. I like the headlights, but those taillights scream Chevy Cruze.

If it was solely the name brand that makes the sale, why did the 3G TL sell like crazy? Why are the current MDX and RDX selling well? The 4G TL didn't sell because of a combination of global financial issues and that beak. They fixed the beak, but by that time, the tech in the car had become "yesteryear" and the reputation of being "ugly" had already been slapped on it. I thought the car was designed poorly initially, but after the beak update, thought it was decent. But now I won't buy it (at least I don't think so, lol) because its technology is behind the times in comparison to its class (a class I find hard to qualify sometimes).

JM2010 SH-AWD

Thanks for going the extra mile to ensure you've properly insulted all of us 4G owners about the appearance of our cars.

Rocket_man

This was not your statement earlier... this is it... "I was a huge fan of Acura but they really refused to listen to their customers. Their vehicles have become ugly as sin. "

You made a broad statement of Acura vehicles in an attempt to start something. If you had made a statement like 'many have said the 4G TL 'beak' was fugly' I wouldn't argue because many have said something similar. While many others have no problem with it, many bought one, but your initial statement was intended to cause an effect, it was not a statement of fact. Now you are trying to walk back your earlier statement.

The 4G TL Beak is a popular target of those just wanting to stir something up. It's really old now and annoying.

No one will be bothered if you hang out here or anywhere else on this forum. But people don't like posts intended to insight.

ichi d

JT4

Of course you finding the 4G Hideous, Fugly, Grotesque, etc means nothing to me and doesn’t change the fact that I like the 4G. So if you think I’m upset because you don’t like the 4G you’re really missing the point. I make the payments so your opinion means nothing.

Here is my issue, you go out of your way and IMO go way over the top to bash the 4G. Again you find it Fugly, Hideous, Grotesque and let’s not forget “ugly as sin”..

But yet in your post you say that you would trade your 2001 TL for a 4G in a “heartbeat”… How does this make sense?? If you find the 4G so appalling to look at how could you possibly stand to look at it every time you go to drive it?

Maybe I'm crazy but if I find a car so ugly I wouldn't take it for free.. Well, maybe I would and then resell it. But you get the point.

I apologize to the other AZ members for taking this thread off the TLX topic that it was intended for.

Acura_Dude

BTW I don't know if anyone knows or if it has been stated earlier, but Acura.com has the 2014 TL & TSX up now. I'm almost positive next year we'll see the TLX in the summer or fall if Acura goes the same route (timeline) as the new RDX & MDX.

KeithL

No way they can wait that long. CLA and CTS due any day, IS and Q50 out already, early 14 will see the A3 in the mix as well followed by new Genesis, they will be the last car in the class to be released. Every month they wait are long term sales lost. Especially with the US economy picking up and car sales booming.

The car is clearly about ready since it was spotted testing, they do not need to wait 10 months. I still think production unveil in Detroit in January with March on sale date.

docboy

I'm eager to check out the new CLA, which even has caught my wife's attention, who is a Lexus snob. Looks promising, esp with it starting at $29k, and the AMG 4Matic looks like an all weather killer.

I'm curious to know why Acura has pushed out the release date of the TLX out so long. The longer Acura waits, the more they lose out in the current increased momentum of pent up demand for new vehicles. Unless Acura was banking on the success of the RLX (which sold only 459 units this August)

TLX Spring 2015 release anyone?

keith7120

Interesting you say that. When I go to the website of Goodson Acura of Dallas, they not listing any 2014 TL's or 2014 TSX on their website. They are listing the 2013 for both. Either they don't have any or the are simply selling the 2013 as a 2013 in 2014.

Colin

I don't think anyone has '14s yet, the '14 TSX JUST went up on the internal network yesterday (or maybe Monday). '14 TLs are in transit, but (to my knowledge) we haven't even ordered '14 TSXs yet.

Colin

I believe they're still clawing back the 9 months lost from the tsunami. Doesn't it seem like EVERY car since has been late (Accord, ILX, MDX, RDX not to mention Pilot and Ridgeline)? I also remain unconvinced that they 'lose out'. Buyers "in the know" are aware of car release timetables and often hold off a purchase till all the cards are on the table. Obviously, some will move, but some will wait... especially current Acura customers.

Having said that, it wouldn't be a bad idea to 'tease' the new car a little more. But this is true to form. If its an all new model, they show early (NSX) but if there is a version in production (TL and TSX) they tend to delay to 'preserve' sales of the current model. IMO, at the current sales rates for these two cars, why not show early? Not much to 'lose' there.

TC2010shawd

I searched Autotrader for fun and there were plenty of 2014's currently on dealer lots.

KeithL

If that is really true, then Acura has bad prioritization. Do you get your high end low volume car out or your bread and butter high volume sedan? They have to face reality and realize that if they want to play with the big boys it will take years and more than one generation of the RLX. On top of that the real "halo" RLX still is not out. they could have done the TLX and been racking up 3-5K units a month right now or maybe more, back to the 7K a month hey day of the 3G. The 4G TL has them so paranoid they don't know what to do anymore. ILX comes out under-powered to "test" the low end without giving up the TSX too fast and. They need to be "all in" and stop dancing around.

hadokenuh

^^ True. I agree they are too conservative but that's understandable because Honda is still a small company and may not have all the extra cash like Toyota.

KeithL

I keep hearingi that Honda is small, but clearly they have innovated some tech in the past and as for styling, that costs the same. What they need to do is hire some good marketing people and then some leaders with a vision and strategy. They have proven they can build good cars, they just need to do some good market research and figure out who the demo is and how to develop something to reach that demo?

Colin

I did say that I don't "think" but thanks for the correction. We currently have no 2014 TLs in stock.

I couldn't disagree more. The Accord, Civic and CR-V pay the bills for the other cars in the lineup. This product clearly has the priority within HMC.

This debate goes back to what Acura is for (to Honda). As I understand it, the goal was to be an intercept brand for Honda. It was supposed to capture customers that moved up from Civic>Accord and then on to the Euros. In this respect, I think they've succeeded.

Where the strategy has suffered is what to do with them once we've got them. If the TL capture stated a family and needed an SUV, we're well positioned. However, if they want a 5 Series or E class, we're not as well positioned. Should Acura have something to compete in this class?

As for 3G vs 4G comparisons. The best year for 3G was ~70K a year, that's not quite 7G per year as noted. However, it's obvious that the 4G hasn't hit the lower mark either. Much has been written on this but (IMO) the single most influential factor was the higher price.

Anyway, all this is IMO, I do not speak for Acura or Acura of Honolulu.

KeithL

Maybe that is the problem, just making Acura a step up for Honda buyers is not a good long term strategy IMO. To grow Acura, if that is what they want then, they need to grow via conquest as well. The upper segments are a finite market that is very crowded. Having a 7 series or S class is useless to attract buyers if the 3 series or C class were not there and a decent car.

Colin

I don't know, I think its an excellent long term strategy that needs better execution. For most folks, the 4G TL underperformed. However, if you view the 2G TSX and 4G TL as the same car (both based on Accord afterall) then the combined sales were actually pretty close to the 3G. Let's say the TLX strategy had been done back in 2009? Would be be lamenting the state of TL sales?

Acura_Dude

Definitely see where you're coming from and I'm a BIG fan of the Q50. Though it wouldn't surprise me if Acura unveiled the TLX this fall/winter and sell it at the end of spring early summer like the RDX/MDX. March could be a possibility since the RLX went on sale in that month and was unveiled a few mos prior. I guess only time will tell. I'm hoping that acura pulled out all the stops for the TLX.

THIS.