Edward'TLS

The RL name is ruinned. Nobody wants the RL. If the car can't sell, there is no competitive edge whatsoever. The car is a disgrace to the Acura brand. Acura needs a new name for that upcoming new RL replacement.

SpicyMikey

Curious, what do you think has ruined the name "RL"?

Edward'TLS

The name "RL" reminds people of the overpriced, underpowered, bland-looked luxury-car-wanna-be that not many people want to buy. It indeed is a technological wonder, but the whole package is a disaster. The sales figure tells all about it's popularity.

The Vigor was also a disaster for Acura, and Acura got rid of the name in no time.

SpicyMikey

The RL is underpowered compared to it's competitors; GS, M35, 535, etc. but not by much. I'd hardly call that a huge disadvantage for people doing test drives (especially someone in the market for a midsized lux sedan). Infiniti, BMW, and Lexus all have v8 versions of their mid size sedans. How many of them do you see driving around versus their v6 siblings? It's at least 9-1 for the v6. That can't be the problem with the poor sales.

"Bland looking" is a subjective term and is not measurable. However, it's far from ugly by anyone's standards and looks more like the current MB-E then an Accord. Looks can't be the reason it's a poor seller.

Overpriced? Have you shopped for midsize lux sedans lately? if the RL is overpriced then what do you call a comparably equiped 535 pushing $65k? Edward, you can call the RL a few things, but "overpriced" is not one of them my friend.

Sure the RL could be improved. But, I don't think there's really anything seriously wrong with the RL or it's name. The problem is with the Acura brand. People just don't want to spend $50k+ on an Acura. The name doesn't make enough of a statement. Americans are very status conscious. Toyota figured that out and invested heavily in branding the name Lexus as a status symbol. Honda never did that for Acura and they will pay the price whenever they try to getting in that $50k area. If they put a v8 in the Acura and increase the size, then it's going to be at least $7k more expensive. Man, you think sales are bad now?

I just don't think there's really much wrong with the RL. Everyone's looking in the wrong place. It's the brand that needs fixing. Stick a Lexus badge on the RL and it would sell very well -- 290 hp v6 and all!

yohan81718

just because RL wasn't a big success, doesn't mean acura needs to dump it... that's the worst solution i've ever heard..

Ken1997TL

Had one of those and played Space Quest as well....












And obviously I've moved on.

DOSbox for the win

mrdeeno

people just don't want to spend $50k on an Acura, but are willing to spend less...hence the RL is "overpriced" at its MSRP.

F23A4

While not as popular as its contemporaries, I would not go so far as to say that the RL is a ruined moniker. Being a remarketed Nissan Gloria, the 1G M45 was a sales disaster for Infiniti but, Nissan still brought the name back with a superb second effort. (And if you count the M30, the Infiniti M name bombed twice.)

While the Vigor did not sell well, it ultimately evolved into the VERY successful Acura TL. (i.e.: Vigor -> 2.5TL/3.2TL -> 3.2TL -> TL)

mrdeeno

I don't think the 5-minute Edit setting is actually 5-minutes...it feels more like 2-3 minutes, but whatever.


Other automakers compete right at Acura's MSRP with a V8 engine...it's just that these other automakers give customers the choice to pick what is important to them at that price...V8 or various options, or spend more and get both.

Acura's one-size-fits-all approach is all wrong in this market segment and is why the RL is "overpriced".

mrdeeno

So the CL was discontinued for "other" reasons besides not meeting sales expectations, right?

It's a bad solution because they should be fixing what is wrong, not killing off the name, but I don't think we should have this much faith in Acura nowadays.

SpicyMikey

Now we're just arguing over the meaning of the word "overpriced". If you're trying to say the RL lacks "value" in the eyes of the consumer, then you won't get an argument from me. I own one, and love it. I think it's worth MORE then I paid. But, I'm obviously a minority. But to say it's price is too high for the features you get, that's just not true. The RL (along with the M35) are the two best valued mid size sports sedans on the market. Even the well priced Lexus GS falls short by about $5000 when you add everything up.

Dropping the price would certainly help the sales, but that doesn't prove price is the core problem. Dropping the price would always help sales on any car. No, the RL's problem goes deeper then that.

The car has a few problems conspiring against it. But, I still assert it's mostly caused by a mismatch between the brand image and the car image. I have lots of thoughts on what that means, but it probably would make this post too long and we're going OT. In short; fix the brand, not the car.

SiGGy

Sorry but he's right, the RL needs to be discontinued. And they need to re-introduce another luxury car.

And your right, it's not priced too high for the features you get... however...

If the RL wasn't bland/boring/underpowered it would be selling... it's just that simple.

It's priced too high right now for how bland/boring it looks from the outside. It doesn't have a luxury car appeal. It looks like a big Accord... hence no one takes it seriously that's shopping in it's price range.

mrdeeno

You can have a lot of "value" and still be overpriced, or you can offer very little "value" and be priced right on target. Consider the 5-series and the RL...5-series offers little value, but people are willing to pony up close to the asking price, hence it is priced right even with little value. The RL offers a lot of value, even at the MSRP, but if very few people are willing to pony up to that price, it is overpriced.

But the "brand" and the "car" are not independent factors. A strong brand can support a weak car, and a strong car can support a weak brand...in Acura's case, it is a weak car trying to support a weak brand (before all you fan boys start flaming me for calling the RL 'weak', please finish reading my post first).

The brand is "weak" in the $50k range simply because they never demonstrated any ability to sell successfully at this range.

The car is "weak" because it does not fit easily into the market segment: no V8, only AWD, conservative styling, few options and trims, etc.

So was it really any surprise that the RL is not selling well?

Compare this to BMW: strong brand coupled with strong product...it sells at it's non-value higher price range, but it is not "overpriced" because it is selling successfully at that price.

MB: strong brand coupled with mediocre product. It sells also at a higher price with little value, but it is not "overpriced" because it is still selling successfully at its price range.

But ultimately, the brand is defined by the products (car). You can advertise and market your brand as the best and most luxurious in the world, but if your product doesn't live up to the "marketing", then your brand is going down...consider Cadillac in the 80's and 90's for example. It was a strong brand that got dragged down by its lackluster products, and now it is relying on its products to bring the brand back.

F23A4

Honestly, Honda needs to fix both.

SpicyMikey

I can agree with most of what Deeno just said. I think you get something that others might be missing. Yes the car is weak. But so is the brand. More to the point, there's a connection that must exist between the brand and it's products. They have to match. The RL is out of sync with the brand.

Acura is advertised as more of a guys brand. It's more about performance, etc. Their commercials are all depicting guys and speed, etc. The voice overs are always a rough sounding guy; Acura....Advance! Lexus, on the other hand, is a chick brand. Most of their commercials use a silky smooth talking british guy and usually show girls in their ads. So, wIth this advertising backdrop, Acura goes ahead and builds this RL. A safe, reliable, comfortable looking and driving sedan. It doesn't fit the brand. All the guys coming into the showroom are attracted to the TL and MDX. Should Acura be surprised? Should we be surprised? That's who the brand advertises too. What does Acura expect? Put the RL on a Lexus showroom floor and it would outsell the GS. I'm pretty sure of that.

So what does Acura do? To get slightly back on topic, does adding a v8 to the RL (or any of their sedans) fix the problem? Will they immediately start selling thousands of 4.2L RL's each month? I just don't know for sure, but I think Acura has obviously lost their focus and therefore the brand has lost it's focus also. This problem goes WAY beyond the RL. I think the RL sales are just a symptom of the problem.

bigman

Acura can get rid of the RL. They had no probs getting rid of the CL. If they get rid of the RL, make the TL more of an M45, E class, 5 series fighter, and bring the TSX up to do battle with the 3 series, c class, and G's. Imagine the TSX with a turbo 4 making 280+ horses with sh-awd to do at thousands less than a 335, i think it's be a winner.

mrdeeno

They can get rid of the RL, but I don't think they should or need to.

They haven't ruined the "RL" name, they just haven't done much with it. The RL does not stand out as a "great" car to the public, but also it does not stand out as a "failure" to the public either, which means it still has potential.

had the RL been introduced as a death trap with horrible reliability ratings with no features or value that critics and the general public alike universally panned, then I can see a reason for retiring a name, but this is not the case.

CleanCL

iTrader: (4)

why does everyone have a hardon for RWD?

give me AWD (which honda has done well) any day of the week.

JediMindTricks

i agree with spicymikey in that the main problem with the RL isn't the car itself but acura/honda.

i also agree that it depends on what you consider the definition of "overpriced." at $50k, though, i really don't think the car, itself, with its engine, features, technology, etc is overpriced compared to its v6 competitors. i think it's just that people aren't willing to pay $50k for an acura. i think as a brand, acura isn't on the level of lexus, bmw, mb, audi, etc. where people are willing to pay extra for the badge.

i also don't think it's really that much underpowered compared to its v6 counterparts. it's just that acura's competitors all offer v8's in that segment. whether or not it's worth it for honda to develop a v8 engine is another argument (especially since this thread is about honda making a v10. ). but a v8 badge does carry a certain stigma to a car. however, just because acura throws in a v8 engine doesn't necessarily mean that alone will change the perception of the brand and more people will buy it. i would say that most of the 5-series, M's, GS', A6's that are sold are the v6 versions.

i would say that, though, that in that segment, the RL, though i think is a very nice looking car, is the most bland-looking. (well, maybe except the E-class.) i dunno how many times i've heard people say that the RL looks like the accord.

another thing that i think the RL suffers from is that, although it is acura's flagship sedan, it's not a TRUE flagship like the LS, 7series, S-class, A8. there are actually people who think that the RL is an LS competitor and are turned off by the (in comparison) weak engine and small size.

and that leads to the market segments acura's competing in. while the rest of the luxury brands are competing in set, consistent segments (IS vs. G vs. 3 vs. A4 or GS vs. M vs. 5 vs. A6, etc), acura's just kind of all over the place and competing in between markets.

i also agree with F23A4 in that the RL name isn't necessarily ruined. acura just needs to do a better job next time around. he brought up a good point in that the previous M was and not a very popular car at all.

so i don't think the RL should be discontinued. it's a great car that could be better, in my opinion. i just think acura needs to work on its brand image a little more. they're trying.

biker

Honda has this thing about cylinders - too few at the bottom end (TSX) and perhaps too many at the top end (V10). I always wondered why the heck the Goldwing (or VTX) has a 6 cyl engine - one would think a good sized 4 cyl engine on that size bike would have been fine. Honda is at its core an engine maker - if they think 10 cyl would do the trick, I'm not going to argue - but for gosh sakes have the whole package not just the engine.

SpicyMikey

Excellent point Jedi. The RL is given shit for not being a formidable flagship. Well who's fault is that? It's not the RL's fault. There's a hole in acura's product line at the top. They're missing a product that can compete with a 7 series or an LS.

I agree. getting rid of a good midsize sedan would be a step in the wrong direction. That would be retreating. I think they need to tweak this car a bit. Maybe make the A-Spec package standard and give it a v8 option (or v10 if they want), and THEN follow that up with a 200+ inch lux sedan with a v8 standard.

Of course, they simultaneously need to define what Acura stands for using some serious marketing. If they just threw these cars out there and continued to just market "Acura" in the same way, I think they will get killed. Acura is already known as a youthful performance leaning brand. They should build on that and keep the message focused. They can't try to be everything to everyone like Mercedes Benz. It took MB 100 years of crafting their brand to get to that point. I think they need to stay more focused like Porche or Lexus marketing. Only now is Lexus really trying to broaden their image with some performance products. But that's AFTER first being very successful and a leader in the "soft and cushy" category. Acura can't go after both at the same time, and I think that's a big reason for why the RL is failing. It's a great car for what it is. It's just too far off message.

JediMindTricks

i think that's a good point about the a-spec package. the RL is a very pretty car, but it pales in comparison to, say, the M. it just looks so bland and conservative in comparison. however, that changes whenever i see an RL with the a-spec package. and the 17" wheels are just too boring (style-wise and size-wise) for that class.

IF acura is trying to be a performance luxury brand, then they can't have conservative looking cars. speaking to a lot of car enthusiasts at work, that's one thing the TL, MDX, and to some extent the TSX got props for. unlike the typical honda, they're aggressive and mean looking cars.

SpicyMikey

Thats true. The RL has great potential and good lines. It's the lack of a standard underbody kit and those wheels. You look at an RL with the A-Spec package and upgraded wheels and it looks great. I have the underbody kit on mine (see avatar) but I couldn't swap the wheels because it has pax tires. When those tires go I'm changing out the wheels!

That's one thing the germans seems to understand more then the Japs. The little things matter. I had to spend $2500 on accessories just to "finish" my car. Steerign wheel, upgraded shifter, full body kit, etc., etc. This shit should be standard so it looks good on the showroom floor. It adds a little cost but I think they'd actually sell more (in this "guy/performance" segment)

Moog-Type-S

VTX is a v-twin not a flat six

SpicyMikey

After reading this article just now, maybe John Watts needs to rethink that idea about dropping v10's in Acura's

http://www.motorauthority.com/news/i...-land-cruiser/

phile

The new LC looks hideous.

BENDER08

I think that Honda should listen to us on acurazine what we have to offer in ideas about the tl,rl,tsx, and a coupe thats long overdue.

I've read allot of the ideas and man if i had the money to produce a car with some of the ideas i would be rich and a happy car owner.

Edward'TLS

It's good that you feel this way about the RL. That's why you bought the car. Like I said in the earlier post I too agreed that the RL was a wonderful car. It's a technological marvel. I'm sure many people share your view, but are they willing to fork out $50K for it - NO. Just wish that here are more (many many many more) others who agree with you and willing to buy one to save the RL from dwindling sales. Man, it's not for me or you to determine whether the sales is good or bad. It's Acura who found that the RL was a long way off from the factory projected sales figure even in its first year of release, and keeps declining year after year.

It may not be as overpriced, overly-bland, and under-powered as you think, but a bit of this and a bit of that all add up making the overall RL package unattractive to buyers. Even though it may not seems overpriced by you, but if people are not willing to fork out $50K for such an excellent car, the car is overpriced. You can compare the hell out of 535, E350, or even GS350, but in terms of people actually go and buy it, it is at the losing end. People are simply not willing to pay $50K for such an Acura package, be it a RL, WL, XL, YL, or ZL.

I bet if Acura lowered the price by $10K, the RL will be selling like hotcakes. It's a cruel world out there. Buyers are the judges. No matter how good the car is, if it can't sell, it ain't good enough, whether the problem(s) are with the car or with the brand or both. Cars that don't sell not only make a car company lose money, and even if it doesn't ruin the brand, it doesn't nothing in lifting the much need brand image.

Looking closely, the TL, MDX, CSX (Canada only) have been selling like hotcakes in comparison, so the brand has no problem selling sub-$40K cars. Unfortunately, the Acura/RL package is not one of them, and we can blame it all on the Acura brand, but the car is still not selling. Acura creates a package : brand + car. You can't separate the two. The fact is people are not buying this $50K Acura RL luxury-car-wanna-be package. The RL becomes the scapegoat. The longer Acura keeps the current RL, the longer people will associate the RL model name with something that (for whatever reasons) people don't want. It is unfortunate that Acura has created such an unwelcome or uncompetitive package, and even more unfortunate is the model name RL associated with it.

However, the RL package will become more competitive if the ~300hp engine is driving the rear wheels only. The car becomes lighter, faster, less complicated, and thus cheaper. This may not be considered to be something wrong with the car, but it is definitely something wrong with the Honda/Acura strategy.

"Have you shopped for midsize lux sedans lately?" Indeed, I had. Slightly less than two years ago when the current 3.5RL-SHAWD just came out, I was looking for a car for my wife. I cross-shopped the A6 3.2 Quattro, the E320-4matic, and the M35x with the RL, and I bought the A6. It was true that the RL was cheaper comparing to other comparable equipped cars. But there were a lot of options that I didn't want such as sun-roof, navigation, high-end sound system, etc. So other cars became a better choice by letting me add on only the options I really wanted, and it ended up that the custom-optioned A6 was even cheaper than the RL. Remember that not many buyers arm their cars to the teeth with options, especially unnecessary options. By forcing buyers to buy fully-equipped cars only make the cars less competitive pricewisely. Had the RL been $10K cheaper, I would have bought it without even looking at others. Had it been $5K cheaper, I would have thought more about it. Mind you I hadn't even factor in the brand prestiege. One word, overpriced - period.

SpicyMikey

Ed, its sounding like we agree more then we disagree. You said it yourself; "People are simply not willing to pay $50K for such an Acura package, be it a RL, WL, XL, YL, or ZL". I'm just saying that Acura's got a problem when they can't sell a car that is clearly a $ value over it's competition. They sold 552 last month! That's pathetic. Lexus sold over 3000 GS's

I'm just saying Acura needs to look at the bigger picture. More to the point of this thread; will sticking a v10 in an RL make it a winner? Can Acura sell a $60k RL by changing the sheet metal and increasing HP/Torque? Is that the main reason they only sold 552 last month

As you (and everyone else) considers the answer to that question, realize a few things; 1) the vast majority of car buyers don't post on AZ. 2) The majority are more incined to get their auto advice from Consumer Reports then C&D. 3) The majority are more concerned about the numbers at the gas station then the HP and Torque number. 4) 50% of the RL owners are women who make decisions based on what their neighbor drives, tv commercials, and general prestige.

I'm just saying that I think Acura's got serious problems. I think they realize it now. Their sales numbers are down ACROSS THE BOARD over 06 numbers with the exception of the MDX. MDX??? That's an SUV. They have no coupe, they have no sports car, and their best selling product is a truck. Sounds like this talk of going to V10's is a desperate idea to get attention and makes me think Acura is a bit lost right now. The RL sales are a symptom of a bigger problem. It's just the proverbial "dead canary in the coal mine".

JediMindTricks

552?

that is pretty bad...

in my opinion, the hp / engine size is a bit of a paradox. although acura's competitors offer v8's in their models that compete against the RL, the V6's sell more. however, at the same time, even though the v8's don't sell as many (granted they don't make as many), there is a certain stigma and perception that comes along with having that option. people may not buy it or even want, but they like that it's available.

i agree that most of the consumers aren't car enthusiasts/fans or even knowledgeable buyers.

also, and this was briefly mentioned before, what kind of hurts the RL's sales as well is that it doesn't allow the consumer to pick options they want. i know that's changed a little bit now, but i personally know 4-5 people that wanted to buy the RL because of its overall value, but were turned away by options and gadgets they didn't want/need.

with that said, knowing that my next car could very well be a used/pre-owned car, i definitely will take a look at what RL's will be available. i'd imagine that resale value will not be that great, and that will make it more attractive to me.

SpicyMikey

Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying adding a v8 package is a bad idea. I think it's actually a good idea for the general image of Acura (eventhough they won't sell many). The v10 idea sounds stupid for anything but a halo car such as the nsx, and I just don't think it's THEE answer to solve Acura's problems.

Regarding your thought on gettign an RL; The RL depreciation is a bit lower then other sedans in it's class, but it pretty much matches the consistent discounts they sell the car at. In other words, if you buy a new RL(and get that $3500 dealer money they always have) then you won't loose anything over most other cars. I got my $53k RL for $45k. It has a predicted wholesale value of about 38% of MSRP after 4 years. That's $21k. For comparison, a comparably priced 535 has a wholesale value of about 45% off MSRP. Sounds significant until you realize that only equates to about $2k more. Considering the fact that you'd never get a 535 for $8k below sticker, the RL is a better deal even from that perspective (let alone true value). Regardless of buying it new or used, I'd recommend looking at the RL. I did my homework and the RL was a slam dunk decision in the end. If you don't need to "run with the crowd", you'll be extremely happy with this car. It's the best deal out there right now.

mrdeeno

There's a clear lack of leadership in regards to Acura. Honda needs to:

1) DEFINE what they want Acura to be. Do they want to be sporty (like BMW), luxurious (like Lexus), overpriced and based on image (MB), or something else? Even if it is "something else", they MUST DEFINE what that "something else" is.

2) they must STICK WITH what they defined Acura to be. This means short and long term...if they decide to be a "sporty" brand today, then they will be a "sporty" brand 10 years from now, and every year in between.

3) their products must REFLECT this definition. If they define themselves to be "sporty", then their designs must live up to that...move away from FWD, move away from unnecessary weight of AWD, move away from conservative designs, and move away from family-friendly SUVs and start introducing coupes. If they define themselves as "luxurious", then their cars must live up to this...add more sound insulation, add more "comfort" features, tone down the "techy" interior, add a little more tasteful "bling", tailor ride for comfort over handling, etc.

Basically, it doesn't matter what they defined Acura to be, as long as the products REFLECT the definition.

4) WATCH the competition and the market...whatever they defined themselves as, this also determines who their competitors are and how that particular market works for certain strategies. What is the direct competition doing? What can they do better? What does the market expect? If the particular market expects an available V8, then offer it. If the particular market expects a lot of options, then offer it. They have some lee-way to optimize how they want to address the competition and market, but they still have to consider what was expected in the first place...following the beat of a different drummer doesn't work when everyone else is on their guitar solo.

JediMindTricks

^

SpicyMikey

Amen Deeno. No we're talking. Acura's marketing is terrible and they are not defining this brand in a consistent manner. The average person doesn't have an image of Acura when they see the logo. BMW means sport/luxury. Lexus means luxury. MB means everything! it's the most valuable brand in the car industry (IMO). As a result, they pump out shit for 10 years and still sell tons.

The RL isn't selling, I'd argue, because people interested in that type of car are just not going in the showroom to begin with. It's out of sync with their brand image. It would be like Lexus selling an F150. Ford sells tons of them. Lexus would sell 3 if it was on their showroom floor.

mrdeeno

This makes sense, that you aren't losing much more REAL $$ overall based on the actual purchase price, but this in itself adds to the RL's problem.

1. Lease residuals are based on MSRP...so the residuals are lower meaning the cost to lease is higher, and a lot of (i would even venture to say 'most') people buying MB's, BMWs, Lexii, etc. in this price range are leasing.

2. The general public doesn't know you can get a $53k RL for $45k. And at this MSRP, there are a lot of other comparable competitors.

3. There is a stigma associated with deep discounts, so if a few people in the general public did know about getting a $53k RL for $45k, they may be turned off because they would be wondering why there is such a discount.

4. That leaves it up to the few "car" people who see the value and see what the RL is, and know about the discount, to support the sales numbers, and these people are a very small minority of the car buying public.

SpicyMikey

Agree. Just making a point for Jedi since he was thinking about looking at RL's

You're right. I represent a small group of people. Someone who knows enough about cars to appreciate a good one; is old enough to not get too hung up on 0-60 numbers anymore (sad to admit); and puts less then average value in image/presetige. How many people are there like that? Well, I guess about 552 last month.

If Acura catered to me they would surely go broke.

Edward'TLS

The Acura brand has been setting off on the wrong foot from the very beginning. It started off with a V6 FWD halo (or flagship or top-of-the-line) car which put it squarely in the near-luxury catergory, and is still stuck this way. However, Lexus kicked off with its V8 RWD halo which landed right in the true-luxury catergory. Remember that the LS400 was a bargain at $40K when it was first introduced. It was received well, and the Lexus brand gradually (remember gradually, not the next day) become better known (even though the ES250 had nothing to be cheered at). Now 17 years later, the LS460 ranges from $60K and top at $100K.

Rome wasn't built in one day. You don't just raise the price on a preceived-near-luxury car and think it will sell as a true-luxury car, and in the process lifting the brand image. Volkwagen made the same mistake with its Phaeton, and failed badly. On the other hand, Acura is being very successful as a near-luxuary brand selling vehicles at the sub-$40K range. But the Acura brand is all screwed up if it wants to be a true-luxury brand and starts selling $50K cars.

Acura has two paths to choose. One is continue to be successful as a near-lux brand as it is now. The other is a complete revamp if wanted to be a true-luxury brand.

Once again, price is the key. The 2nd generation TL was a hit. It was priced at an even lower MSRP than the 1st gen. 3.2TL which wasn't doing too well. The 2nd gen. TL was rated as the best value entry-level near-lux buy, by auto reviews and car magazines. For its price at that time, the TL-S in particular, had no peer at 260hp, 17" wheels, sport suspension, and near-lux interior. It has become the top selling near-lux mid-size sedan for many years. Over these years, this good TL image has been well established. Even though price has been creeping up year after year to become no longer a best value buy, it still manages to sell well. In fact the momentum is so good that the 2nd gen tranny problem publicity hardly even put a dent to it.

Now back to the RL problem. The current RL can keep its configuration, but priced at $40K, not $50K. The RL replacement or whatever L with whatever minimum combination of V8/V10/RWD/AWD, even bigger size, more luxury features, and more luxury interior is priced at between $40-$50K, making it a super value buy. Just worry about popularity and recognition first. Once it's well recognized, then raise the price gradually to lift its status. This is going to be long, and is going to be painful. Even for the biggest car company in Japan - Toyota, it takes them 17 years to build the Lexus brand up to the current status, and they had been setting off with the right foot. Better still for Acura is to kill the brand and start all over again, because it will take some time to shake off the Acura=near-lux brand image.

In addition, below are something Acura (or a new brand name) needs to do to become a true-luxury brand :
- create a distintively unique signature grill which must be used in all its models, such as the Audi "dropping jaw", MB "star", and BMW "double kidney". The current pentagon one is already widely copied by Mazda. The new signature marking must NEVER be used on Honda models.
- unify the look on all models. There must be at least a hint of resemblence across all brand models.
- don't cut corners by rebadging (European/Asia/Japanese-Domestic) Honda cars and put them in the Acura line-up, and vice versa. Simply different sheetmetal will make a big different in preception. Put as much distance away between the Honda and the Acura products as possible.
- drop all models that are smaller and cheaper than the TSX, i.e. the CSX.
- allow customers to order their options, don't just sell a fully-optioned car or no car.
- create a high-performance (horsepower-wise, not just a few bolt-on aero pieces) trim on every model line, such as the RS and S in Audi, the M in BMW, the AMG in MB. Dump the biggest, meanest oversized engine into the car/truck. This will sure boost the model image and therefore the brand image.

SpicyMikey

acura really can't drop the price of the RL much lower. If they brought the base RL down to $40k from $46 then it would have ripple effects with other vehicles in their lineup and just start causing TL buyers to go to the RL. In other words, it would help the RL sales but wouldn't help Acura's bottom line. I just don't think they are marketing enough to those type of buyers interested in the RL. They're just not in the showroom. It's more of a marketing problem then a car problem.

Regarding your to-do list for improving the Acura brand image; Good list

Edward'TLS

I'm sure tons of buyers (myself included) are interested in the RL, but bulk at the MSRP. I don't think any amount of marketing can save the RL from sliding sales, only $10K rebates can.

Costco

A lot of people think the RL looks too plain, not to mention they didn't market it very well (its one of the safest vehicles out there, yet its not mentioned in any ads), and made a huge mistake by not offering any options when it first came out; it only came fully loaded. I personally like it a lot but the AWD only is a problem, because all owners are forced to have it even if they live in Florida or some other state where its of no use to them, yet they have to fork out several thousand for it. I think if they named it the Legend (which it is) it would have sold better.

Acura is kind of stuck at the moment and they are going to be forced to move upmarket because their lower end models can compete with Honda products, hence why they killed the RSX in NA. The RSX-S came with a K20, and a 6-speed manual.... but so did the Civic Si, which also boasted a factory LSD and lower MSRP. Though its still going strong in Japan as the Integra.... a name cemented in the conscience of many owners and enthusiasts, along with the Legend. 2 memorable names that are no longer used.

Regarding the earlier posts, I don't see how Acura is slow to revamp their lineups at all. Just bad timing perhaps. They have a MMC after 3 years in production and a FMC after 5 years - pretty quick compared to competitors. Previous gen. Lexus GS was in production for 8 years, same with the 5-series and E-Class.

The RL doesn't have anything that truly sets it apart from the competition. No longer had the nameplate that carried Acura for 10 years. SH-AWD? The average consumer doesn't know the difference from regular AWD, probably wouldn't understand and probably doesn't care anyway. Still has a 5-speed auto, with no manual option, which hurts Acura's image as a "sporty" brand. I would definitely take a 535xi over an RL.

Honda/Acura needs to resurrect the brand image that it is an "engine manufacturer" and that they just build cars to showcase their engines. The J35 is trumped by the newest iterations of the 2GR from Toyota and VQ35 from Nissan. Hopefully I will be quoted on this, but I expect them to stuff a tuned J37 from the MDX into the RL next MMC at the very least. Direct injection would help their engines produce more power and economy... they have tried it in the K-series but have yet to add it to any other engines, which is a shame. VW uses FSI in Audis and Audi is quickly gaining on BMW and MB, and Toyota's direct-injection 2GR-FSE even trumps the VQ35HR, which trumps the J35A3. Who knows, they may debut an A-VTEC engine in the next RL, though probably unlikely. They need to do something to pick up the slack... the TSX, TL and MDX can only keep them afloat for so long.

Another thing, Honda.... isn't it time you ditched the timing belt? I know it saves you money, but Nissan owners have been laughing at us for years and still are.