infantry

I get your point about Acura not offering top tier cars . But in my Opion BMW does produce questionable quality vics . I am a owner of a 328 and former owner of a 2003 330c and they are at best average . Living in Germany for about 6 years and being married to a german, I can tell you the Germans dont even praise BMWs . I think its strange that you can badge something as luxury but it doesent have reliability .

Moog-Type-S

^^^ Luxury and reliability are apples and oranges.

infantry

Price does not justify luxury, either .

stangg172004

^ the hell it doesnt! its exactly what it mean...

SpicyMikey

Price alone doesn't make a car "luxury" (to me). Call me weird but a luxury car has to offer luxury That means, features and amenities that are above the "every man" car. Price usually follows with that but it can vary. When shopping around for my next car I found the RL to be every bit a luxury car (if not more) then the 335 and the E350 eventhough comparably equiped they were $15k more.

Now if you want to talk about snob appeal and image, that's different. Price is very much a key factor there. For the majority driving around in an E350 or a 335i (for example) they are usually trying to make a statement that says; "Hey look at me. I'm so financially well off that I was willing to pay 20% more for this car then an RL just to be part of a more exclusive club." In the cases where that is true, I tip my hat to them. I'm not to the point yet where I can treat $20,000 like $2000.

Unfortunately, I suspect a large majority driving one of those cars really can't make that statement. They really should be driving a Camry and really have no true appreciation for the unique handling and power characteristics those brands can offer. They're just brand whores. For me, that taints the brand. It's not the products fault. It's an unfortunate byproduct of the great brand image they have built.

F23A4

Mercedes Benz ranks ranks below average in dependability (and well below BMW, Infiniti and Lexus) but there is no disputing it being a luxury brand. But, I generally agree with your last sentence. Luxo brands lagging behind in the quality dept. need to get on the ball for the sake of their brand.

nokiaman

Very true statement. There is a faily large number of brand whores(Most of them are very stuck up too) but you gotta remember another large group of buyers are the enthusiasts.(Track days,forums, meets)Those who drive around saying or thinking-I'm so financially well off that I was willing to pay 20% more for this car then an RL just to be part of a more exclusive club- are missing the whole point to the car. I will never understand and never understood brand whores. I bought mine for the drive.If Hyundai or Nissan would've offered the same thing, I'd own one.Most of these E350's and 3 series are also older executives that want to show they have it made(Nothing wrong with that).Few like yourself, know how to recognize a nice car when they see it(RL) but hell aren't we all different

SpicyMikey

No offense to anyone who owns a BMW, etc. If you bought it for the right reasons and can afford it, as I said, I tip my hat to you. Unfortunately I see more times then not where people are buying those cars for the wrong reason. For example my sister just bought a loaded 750Li. Articulating front seats, etc., etc. There ain't no way she will ever be able to appreciate what that car has to offer. She bought it for the image it portrays. She should have bought an Accord and given ME the 750Li

Trackruner228

iTrader: (1)

I agree with people do buy cars for image and it sucks. Like people that buy the totally stripped down 3 series or C class and are going poor making payments on them. However people do buy BMWs because they have that drive that no car can match. I agree that price alone doesnt mean its a more luxury car. If someone bought a fully loaded C class and compared it to someone with an RL even if the C class costs more that doesnt mean its more "luxury."

Have you ever been to the mercedes boards. Now some people there are great no question but man some people were just like "Its the 3 point star what else do you need to know"? What turned me off was how there was a thread comparing them to Lexus and how everyone there was quick to rip on Lexus even though Lexus is selling more cars now then Mercedes. One person even said "I would be embarrased to show up to a meeting in a lexus." Now I am not saying Mercedes is bad or that everyone out there who owns one is an asshole but there are diffenently people that care about brand image.

Moog-Type-S

People talk about "buying a car for image" and how that is horrible.
Welcome to reality where in some instances "image" means EVERYTHING.

For example: You hire an attorney, agent, broker, etc....he shows up at your office...and he pulls up in a Kia. What would you think? First thought...I hope that is a rental car and his real car is in the shop. When said person shows up in a MB, BMW...etc and so on....you think to yourself "This guy is good at what he does...hence the $$$ he has for a fine automobile. In the same way if he showed up in jeans and a t-shirt you would be wondering ...but no, he shows up in a fine suite...perhaps something Italian.

Many times Image means everything...first impressions are important.

On the other side of the coin you may argue that the person has no idea what they bought, they could have saved a ton of $$ and bought something better, and that they bought the car for one reason only: The badge. You would be exactly correct, and they would not have it any other way.

F23A4

Well stated Moog.

SpicyMikey

You're right. There are very respectable reasons for why some people feel compelled to buy for image. It's like walking into a meeting in a cheap suit. It hurts your standing in the eyes of others before you even open your mouth. My sister is a salesperson and image matters. Her 750Li has value in that respect. Me, I own my company and my customers hardly ever meet me. Everything is done over the phone. I can drive an Acura, save money, and have a great car

nokiaman

Very well stated again.

mrdeeno

If one were to place importance on image, as some of the examples given, why would buying for an image be "wrong"?

If someone places importance on the badge of the car, then who are we to say it's "wrong"? Some here place importance on value, some here place importance on features, some here place importance on safety, some here place importance on performance, etc. etc. What makes certain Acura owners so high and mighty that they can say what the "wrong" or "right" reason is to buy a car?

mrdeeno

and FWIW, you wouldn't be driving an "Acura" had it not been for the people who place importance on image.

SpicyMikey

Did I say they were wrong for buying image? If so, let me clear that one up. Image is a valid reason to buy things. People pay thousands of dollars for a Rolex watch when my Movado keeps time just as well. However, others would say, that my Movado is a waste of money with it's gold plated band, etc. Their Timex keeps time as well also. We all have different values (and degrees within that). That's what makes a horse race. Right?

mrdeeno

Yes, and you even provided your sister as an example.

I'm not targeting you, because a lot of others here do the same thing. but your example did ring a bell about people claiming "right" and "wrong" reasons to buy a car.

SpicyMikey

Sorry, you're right. I was projecting my priorities of a car's "value" onto her purchase without even realizing I did it. It's wrong. Fact is, eventhough I think it's stupid to buy a car for it's value as a clothing accessory, no one is wrong for doing it. I agree with you, if not subconsciously.

mrdeeno

My beef isn't with you specifically, seeing that we agree on a lot of other points and you are relatively more open and reasonable than some others (not to mention that you can take criticism of the RL and argue back intelligently, rather than getting pissed and cowering and just posting "You don't have an RL, why are you even here?!?")

But it always amazes me how some here really DO feel 'high and mighty' because other people bought their cars for reasons that are different from them. And it happens on this forum quite often.

Edward'TLS

Even though the base model Audi is not sporty, Audi, BMW, and MB buyers are given the choice of different trim levels to migrate up depending on how much $ or performance they are willing to spare, not like Acura which has very limited trim levels (all with whimpy motors in comparison) or even none for some models. In Audi, the S and RS lines are the top trims. In BMW, that's the M line. In MB, that's the AMG line. But Acura buyers are stuck when trying to move up the trim/$/performance level, no matter how much money they're willing to spend.

The RS4 has a 420hp V8 in the small A4 chassis, the 2006 M3 (333hp I6) / 2007 M3 (420hp V8) in the small 3-series chassis, and the 2007 C55 (362hp V8) / 2008 C63 (451hp V8) in the small C-class chassis. Now this is performance. High output V8 motors have been applied generously to the compact-size chassis model lines. But poor Acura treats it's 300hp V6 as a crown jewel and only use it in the biggest and heaviest flagship sedan in the Acura lineup. However, it seems like the new Honda Accord is heading in the right direction, with three engine choices. But for Acura, V8 and V10 please.

BraveDemon

Are the base model Audi's Sporty? Well no, of course not. But interesting that you chose to liken Acura to Audi when both companies are currently suffering from the FWD platform plague. Why not ask if a base model BMW is sporty?

Have I driven an A-spec RL? I don't know if the US has an A-spec model but I have been behind the wheel of an 07 RL, and (I'm assuming your AU Legend = US RL) it was no way sportier than the 06 STi. BUT, it is by far the most Luxurious Acura I have ever ridden, AND it is a more sport luxury vehicle than a pure lux vehicle.

And the reason why you were able to perform better on the track over your friend who has an 05 STi is most likely because of your Tiptronic transmission; i.e. whereas you can simply pull up or down on the shifter, the STi driver has to heel-toe in order to get the same downshift response. Most likely your friend slipped a few times in the corner will trying to heel-toe OR didn't heel-toe at all.

And I've experienced the SH-AWD in both the RL and the New RDX, and I will say again, I'm not all that impressed. Honda has had an AWD system in play since the 1997 CRV (which I used to own) and the fact is all their AWD vehicles are underpowered.

But I agree with you, Acura/Honda, we want performance.

BTW: to the people who are laughing at Hyundai, go pick up Road and Track Magazine and turn to pg 25.

nokiaman

I don't see anyone doing so. If you were referring to me, you misunderstood me because I chose them as an example specifically .People tend to understimate them because of the badge once again.

Sclass88

I just thought I would share this...

I'm a business student and as part of our circulum, we are required to take a marketing class. Well today, we were discussing brands and what goes into branding a certain product. Toyota/Lexus came up and the professor discussed what worked for them and then she discussed Nissan/Infiniti and what worked for them. However, she never mentioned Honda/Acura until she decided to bash them. However, she did have some interesting things to say about them.

She discussed how Honda nearly killed the Accord because Acura confused people when it first came out as a glorified Accord. She said that many people in the business field on the marketing side, herself included didn't quite consider Acura a premium brand with the likes of Lexus and Infiniti but like we all know, she said that they are certianly on the raise as we speak. It was very interesting to get someone elses point of view. Students were asking quite a few questions about Acura and it made me feel good to know that Acura if FINALY making its name known.

Rivaling Maybach and Bentley, though? I'm scared....

Just thought I'd share.

afici0nad0

+1

sadlerau

You mis-understand. My friend in his STi was ultimately 3 to 4 seconds a lap faster than me, but in the corners, the chassis balance of the Legend when engaging the SH-AWD was better than what my friend was achieving in his STi. And the paddle shifters are an absolute waste of time. They wouldn't downshift at the speeds we were travelling at. You must drive SH-AWD aggressively, putting down the power just before an apex, to help rotate the car around that apex. It works a treat.

And no, the base 5 series BMW is not sporty. It just has a tendacy to oversteer, which for 99% of ordinary drivers is NOT the way to drive safely, or fast.

SpicyMikey

I'm surprised and disappointed to here that. More data please. First, what "speed" were you traveling? Also, are you saying you couldn't shift manually at all, or, was there just an unacceptable delay that made it unusable? I find the delay, even at low speeds, to be a little anoying.

Edward'TLS

When you talk about the chassis balance is better, does it mean the car just feels better, or does it mean the car is faster, through the corners ?

Stability control system on 5-series is able to correct it's tendency to oversteer, so 99% of ordinary drivers is able to drive safely, or fast. However, the car will still oversteer if pushing it to the limits of stability control correction, but this is not 99% of ordinary drivers will do.

JediMindTricks

so if you've been active here at a-zine, you should have nailed the discussion and earned yourself some brownie points from the prof.

sadlerau

To put it in context, I was tracking my car at my local race track. So the corner entry speeds were WAY faster than anything you would approach on public roads [see my post in the RL forum]. As for the actual speeds, I never bother while I'm at the track, it would probably scare me anyway

Generally I find that at anything above 60 kph the transmission is very reluctant to downshift manually, which is VERY annoying. Funnily enough, left in Drive it would downshift just fine, it just meant you can't use engine braking, but the brakes coped well.

sadlerau

The car's balance is better, it negates any tendacy to understeer [which most cars would at track speeds], allowing the tail of the car to come around, just short of oversteering. This allows you to carry a lot more more corner speed. It works really well, until you run out of horsepower to activate the SH-AWD. But here we really are talking race track speeds. On tighter corners, with VSA off, you can very easily oversteer in the Legend if you are carrying too much entry speed.

I understand that BMW's VSA works to counteract the oversteer, but I was stating that in the context of what is sporty about a 528, or whatever the base model is now.

SpicyMikey

Disappointing to hear. Honda never did seem to put a lot of priority in their AT transmissions. I suppose they find it money best spent elsewhere on the car

jwong77

Honda nearly killed the Accord? What kind of crap is she teaching? The accord means so much to honda, that would be suicide. Even if she was talking about a long time ago, the accord was still very important. They sold something like 400K of them in the US alone in 1990!

BraveDemon

Wow, sounds like fun! There's no way that I would've tried to drive my parents' RL like that on my first drive with it, but the next time I visit them I will definitely try.

But, as regards to the base 5 series, I happen to be that 1% that (I guess) wouldn't be considered an ordinary driver; meaning that I prefer understeer rather than oversteer. Especially in CA, where there are probably less than 40 rainy days in the entire year.

And I'd have to disagree, I think even the base 5 series is sportier than any Acura offered currently - main reason being RWD. Yeah I know, Acura driver's remorse (a.k.a. RWD syndrome), but IMO if Acura wants to rival Bentley/Maybach, at some point they will need a RWD platform.

JediMindTricks

i don't think he meant that honda was intentionally trying to "kill off" or discontinue the accord.

Edward'TLS

So much said, but is the RL (Legend) being faster in and out of corners than the STI ? The SH-AWD is more advanced, but the STI has a better power-to-weight ratio, shorter wheelbase, and more nimble.

Honda/Acura doesn't make any DSG transmission. The paddle shifters are misleading. They don't match rev. downshift like the DSG ones. But Audi, BMW, and Ferrari have DSG transmission options for some of their more sporty cars.

While I was trying out my new SportShift transmission six years ago, I almost ran my car off a cliff because the SportShift transmission was so slow in downshifting. Honda/Acura didn't have a true sport transmission six years ago, it still doesn't have one now. So don't drive the car as if it has DSG.

Edward'TLS

I don't understand. All RWD cars will oversteer given enough power to spin the rear wheels, at both ordinary speeds and track speeds. The best way to power RWD cars through corners is to apply enough gas such that the rear wheels are just about to spin. Then by modulating the gas pedal, the driver can dial in the required amount of oversteering (= rear-wheel spin = tail swing) through the corners such as to position the car to head in the correct direction.

sadlerau

No, having RWD does not mean it will oversteer in all situations. My NSX will understeer coming out of tightish, slow speed corners, especially if you use to much throttle. This is different from lighting up the back wheels and inducing oversteer.

Most manufacturers build understeer into their cars, because it is safer for the average motorist. It comes down to the inherent chassis balance the manufacturer wants. Now that doesn't mean a car wont oversteer in a given situation, if you tempt the laws of physics.

Edward'TLS

I agree. I've also heard that most manufacturers dial in a tad of understeer even into their RWD cars, because understeering is comparatively safer and easily recovered than oversteering for the general public. But lighting up the rear wheels will always cause oversteering. This is what the FWD cars can't do.

But FWD cars can also be tuned to oversteer. My previous car was a heavily modded 3-dr Integra. Front heavy, FWD Integra's understeered badly. So I put in Tokico adjustable shocks, Eibach springs, and Suspension Technique sway bars to tune the suspension. In the beginning I overdid the tuning by cranking the front shock real soft and the rear ones real hard. I thought the car was handling neutrally because it no longer understeered. Until one day when I was going round a curve and suddenly let go the gas, the car did a sudden dropped throttle oversteer on me. I simply let go the gas, and not even touching the brakes, but the tail of the car swung around so fast that it scared the $hit out of me. It really caught me by surprise because I didn't expect a FWD car to oversteer like this. But my quick reflexes allowed me to opposite lock the steering two to three times in a row to save the car from spinning into the concrete barriers. My heart was pounding so hard that I could barely breathe even after the car had straightened out. This was the first time I ever believe a front heavy FWD car can oversteer badly if we mess around with the suspension tuning.

TSX69

Acura Won't Compete w/ Lexus on Hybrids
Upmarket Honda brand Acura believes that bigger still is better. Despite indications that the American public may be ready to move to smaller, more fuel-efficient vehicles, the luxury brand intends to keep selling larger vehicles. More surprisingly, despite Lexus’ huge success in the area, Acura will not be selling any hybrid models any time soon, even though Honda is releasing its global hybrid powertrain this year. Instead a new diesel engine will be introduced into the range.

Dick Colliver, executive vice president of Acura, told AutoObserver that hybrids are not a good fit for Acura’s current and future lineup. When it comes to meeting future fuel economy standards with hybrid technology Colliver believes, “when you go into the bigger vehicles, it’s going to be very difficult. Our position is it’s better-suited for smaller cars.”

The diesel option Acura will be introducing will be a 2.2L 4-cylinder i-DTEC unit produced by Honda, possibly headed to the 2009 TSX compact sport sedan, although this has not been confirmed by Colliver. “We will have a diesel in the Acura lineup in the very near future,” is all he says.

Honda is also developing a new V6 diesel unit that could be used in the MDX. This would improve greatly on the car’s current figures of 15mpg in city driving and 20mpg on the highway.

Recent reports have suggested American consumers aren’t ready to embrace diesel powered cars as willingly as hybrids, which could result in Acura’s gamble being a huge loss for the company. We’ll have to wait for the sales figures to see if it pays off.

charliemike

Americans are idiots. As I mentioned in the Caractere thread the A5 3.0TDI does 0-60 in 5.8 seconds and gets 32mpg.

WTF do we need hybrids for again?