Acura: RLX News
#4401
Senior Moderator
#4402
Moderator
#4404
As if you clowns haven't been ridiculing and throwing around underhanded childish insults at anyone that doesn't agree with you. Save it for someone who cares.
Why don't you go price out a BMW 528i, use a little logic for a change and actually compare their specifications; after you add on all the options the car comes out to about $73k, for a turbo 4 with 240 HP, the 535 and 550 get much more expensive. While the RLX doesn't offer a 448 HP V8 it tops out at $61k for good performance, good ride quality, very good interior, lots of technology and decent looks though nothing like Lexus' Predator front ends. So again, the RLX doesn't have as many options to choose from at every incremental price point as BMW or Mercedes but it has similar quality and technology for less. What do you expect it to wash your dishes for you?
So we come back to design; we get it, many of you guys think it's boring or even ugly...so move on, go get a 5 series or E-Class instead of rambling on a forum about how lame it is, how poor Acura's sales are and making up lies about crappy handling or overpriced Accord comments ad nauseum.
Why don't you go price out a BMW 528i, use a little logic for a change and actually compare their specifications; after you add on all the options the car comes out to about $73k, for a turbo 4 with 240 HP, the 535 and 550 get much more expensive. While the RLX doesn't offer a 448 HP V8 it tops out at $61k for good performance, good ride quality, very good interior, lots of technology and decent looks though nothing like Lexus' Predator front ends. So again, the RLX doesn't have as many options to choose from at every incremental price point as BMW or Mercedes but it has similar quality and technology for less. What do you expect it to wash your dishes for you?
So we come back to design; we get it, many of you guys think it's boring or even ugly...so move on, go get a 5 series or E-Class instead of rambling on a forum about how lame it is, how poor Acura's sales are and making up lies about crappy handling or overpriced Accord comments ad nauseum.
Again, what is so ground breaking about this RLX that will allow it to be a sales success? charliemike hit the nail on the head. The last thing a $50k+ car should be described as is that it resembles an Accord.
The following users liked this post:
Sly Raskal (10-30-2013)
#4405
I drive a Subata.
iTrader: (1)
#4406
You'll Never Walk Alone
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Age: 37
Posts: 9,521
Received 846 Likes
on
526 Posts
That's what YOU think.
The average consumers probably do NOT agree with your analysis on it. The sales number don't lie. It's proof of the reality of the status of RLX in the market.
We wouldn't bash the car, if it wasn't so bad as it is now. We are on Acurazine. Ever member on this forum owned and loved Honda/Acura products at one point of our lives.
The average consumers probably do NOT agree with your analysis on it. The sales number don't lie. It's proof of the reality of the status of RLX in the market.
We wouldn't bash the car, if it wasn't so bad as it is now. We are on Acurazine. Ever member on this forum owned and loved Honda/Acura products at one point of our lives.
Again, the RLX is missing a two key things: A prestigious emblem and a striking, beautiful, elegant design.
What's your opinion on the car? We know the styling and brand prestige are not good enough. But what else? Why do you think the RLX is "so bad." Excuses like "slow sales" or "I'd take the Accord Touring" does not cut it. We What's causing the slow sales? Why do you think people compare the RLX to the Accord, but no one compares the base A6 to the Accord?
What exactly does the RLX do that is any different from what the 2G RL did? I would be stunned if the RLX was a runaway sales success. Instead, apologists will repeat ad nauseum the same old excuses: lack of marketing, the economy, and supply issues.
The RLX does many things well, but nothing mind-blowing. At least half of the people looking at one aren't going to give a crap about PAWS, other than that it is a silly sounding acronym. Otherwise, inoffensive and unimpressive from the outside. That's not the way to go when you don't have brand equity like BMW and MB do.
Perhaps that is Acura's niche. Acura is like that frumpy looking girl with a great personality. Relatively few people give her a chance, but those who do rave all about her.
Let me know when Acura manages to consistently move half as many RL/RLXs as either BMW does with their 5-series or MB does E-Class
The RLX does many things well, but nothing mind-blowing. At least half of the people looking at one aren't going to give a crap about PAWS, other than that it is a silly sounding acronym. Otherwise, inoffensive and unimpressive from the outside. That's not the way to go when you don't have brand equity like BMW and MB do.
Perhaps that is Acura's niche. Acura is like that frumpy looking girl with a great personality. Relatively few people give her a chance, but those who do rave all about her.
Let me know when Acura manages to consistently move half as many RL/RLXs as either BMW does with their 5-series or MB does E-Class
So what's so different between the 2G RL and RLX, other than extra features?
I believe two of the biggest complaints about the 2G RL were lack of rear space and its bland exterior design. While Acura completely fixed the space issue, the exterior is still bland.
Other than that, I agree with you. The RLX is competitive in many areas, but nothing mind-blowing. To me, that is true for a lot of the competitors too. The key difference is that those brands have power, Acura does not.
Assuming that Acura fixes the styling issue, do you think the RLX will sell 50% as well as the 5 series, E Class?
Sure you can. It won't be 100% exact, but they'll be very close.
Accord Touring (with Navi) is $34,270 (MSRP). RLX with Navi is $51,845 (MSRP). What does that extra $17,575 buy you?
Going down the list of features, the most notable differences I can see are:
Everything else (MPG, passenger room, cargo space, safety features, comfort and convenience features, etc) seems to be the same. Are those extra features on the RLX really worth that extra $17,575?
$17,575 can buy a lot of upgrades for the Accord with plenty of change to spare.
Accord Touring (with Navi) is $34,270 (MSRP). RLX with Navi is $51,845 (MSRP). What does that extra $17,575 buy you?
Going down the list of features, the most notable differences I can see are:
- 32 extra HP (RLX: 3.5 liter V6 310 HP vs Accord: 3.5 liter V6 278 HP)
- 20 lb ft more torque (RLX: 272 @ 4500 rpm vs Accord : 252 @ 4900 rpm)
- P-AWS
- 4-wheel independent double-wishbone front and multi-link rear suspension system (RLX) vs MacPherson Strut Front Suspension and Multi-Link Rear Suspension (Accord)
- better audio system (RLX: ELS Premium Audio System with 10 speakers vs Accord: 360-Watt AM/FM/CD Premium Audio System with 7 Speakers, including Subwoofer)
- 18" wheels vs 17" wheels
- SportShift paddle shifters
- 12-way power seat vs 10 way
- LED-illuminated door handles
- Driver's knee airbag
- better materials
- shorter 70–0 mph braking distance (RLX: 166 ft vs Accord: 178 ft)
- premium fuel
- Acura badge
Everything else (MPG, passenger room, cargo space, safety features, comfort and convenience features, etc) seems to be the same. Are those extra features on the RLX really worth that extra $17,575?
$17,575 can buy a lot of upgrades for the Accord with plenty of change to spare.
I don't think that's true for everyone here though. There are folks who claim the RLX is simply a bad car. I guess "bad" has a broad definition?
#4407
Some dude
.......... really?! You seriously think that people all over are saying to consider an Accord instead is not a valid argument against this car? How much Honda kool-aid did you drink this morning? No one goes to look at a Lexus LS and leaves thinking "You know what, I'll get an Avalon instead."
#4408
That was what I think...and it's more of less the same as what most publications are saying - good value, competitive performance & handling, lots of features, nice ride, etc.
Again, the RLX is missing a two key things: A prestigious emblem and a striking, beautiful, elegant design.
What's your opinion on the car? We know the styling and brand prestige are not good enough. But what else? Why do you think the RLX is "so bad." Excuses like "slow sales" or "I'd take the Accord Touring" does not cut it. We What's causing the slow sales? Why do you think people compare the RLX to the Accord, but no one compares the base A6 to the Accord?
This is kinda true, but I'd just like to know the opinions of others too. Why do they think the RLX is a really bad car? I'd be disappointed if all they can say is things like, "because it doesn't sell, "because it's bland," "because I can get the Accord Touring for $35k," etc. Those are just too lame.
Now this is better. This is the sort of response that I hope people can make.
So what's so different between the 2G RL and RLX, other than extra features?
I believe two of the biggest complaints about the 2G RL were lack of rear space and its bland exterior design. While Acura completely fixed the space issue, the exterior is still bland.
Other than that, I agree with you. The RLX is competitive in many areas, but nothing mind-blowing. To me, that is true for a lot of the competitors too. The key difference is that those brands have power, Acura does not.
Assuming that Acura fixes the styling issue, do you think the RLX will sell 50% as well as the 5 series, E Class?
I think the Accord Touring would make a lot of more expensive cars seem overpriced if you take away the prestige factor.
Totally agree on this.
I don't think that's true for everyone here though. There are folks who claim the RLX is simply a bad car. I guess "bad" has a broad definition?
Again, the RLX is missing a two key things: A prestigious emblem and a striking, beautiful, elegant design.
What's your opinion on the car? We know the styling and brand prestige are not good enough. But what else? Why do you think the RLX is "so bad." Excuses like "slow sales" or "I'd take the Accord Touring" does not cut it. We What's causing the slow sales? Why do you think people compare the RLX to the Accord, but no one compares the base A6 to the Accord?
This is kinda true, but I'd just like to know the opinions of others too. Why do they think the RLX is a really bad car? I'd be disappointed if all they can say is things like, "because it doesn't sell, "because it's bland," "because I can get the Accord Touring for $35k," etc. Those are just too lame.
Now this is better. This is the sort of response that I hope people can make.
So what's so different between the 2G RL and RLX, other than extra features?
I believe two of the biggest complaints about the 2G RL were lack of rear space and its bland exterior design. While Acura completely fixed the space issue, the exterior is still bland.
Other than that, I agree with you. The RLX is competitive in many areas, but nothing mind-blowing. To me, that is true for a lot of the competitors too. The key difference is that those brands have power, Acura does not.
Assuming that Acura fixes the styling issue, do you think the RLX will sell 50% as well as the 5 series, E Class?
I think the Accord Touring would make a lot of more expensive cars seem overpriced if you take away the prestige factor.
Totally agree on this.
I don't think that's true for everyone here though. There are folks who claim the RLX is simply a bad car. I guess "bad" has a broad definition?
The Accord V6 Touring makes MANY luxury cars seem like they're not worth the extra money.
EX. 320i, CLA, A4, Base A6, IS250, ES350, TSX, Base TL, etc. There are many more.
.......... really?! You seriously think that people all over are saying to consider an Accord instead is not a valid argument against this car? How much Honda kool-aid did you drink this morning? No one goes to look at a Lexus LS and leaves thinking "You know what, I'll get an Avalon instead."
I'm not going to deny the RLX needs some work, but it really isn't as horrible as everyone thinks.
Last edited by H_CAR; 10-25-2013 at 02:57 PM.
#4409
Is there much of a difference between Lexus' flagship LS 460 and the Toyota Camry (or Avalon)? Is there much of a difference between Audi's flagship A8 and the VW Passat? Is there much of a difference between BMW's flagship 7 series and.... (what's the equivalent of the Honda Accord... the Mini Clubman)?
I'll even throw this one out there... Is there much of a difference between Hyundai's flagship Equus and the Hyundai Sonata?
Does the Camry V6 XLE make the Lexus LS 460 seem like it's not worth the money?
Does the VW Passat V6 SEL make the Audi A8 seem like it's not worth the money?
Does the Hyundai Sonata Limited 2.0T make the Hyundai Equus seem like it's not worth the money?
Does the Mini Clubman make the BMW 7 series seem like it's not worth the money?
See what I'm doing here guys? I'm comparing a company's luxury flagship to their non-luxury brand's top model (or Accord equivalent).
The RLX isn't a "bad" car. It's just not a car that I would want to own if I was shopping for a luxury flagship. And a lot of people seem to agree based on sales #s
Last edited by AZuser; 10-25-2013 at 04:25 PM.
The following 5 users liked this post by AZuser:
Costco (10-25-2013),
JS + XES (10-25-2013),
jwong77 (10-26-2013),
Sly Raskal (10-30-2013),
ttribe (10-25-2013)
#4410
I drive a Subata.
iTrader: (1)
Didn't even know a brand new FWD RLX loaded with options is +$60k.
Holy balls.
Holy balls.
#4411
You'll Never Walk Alone
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Age: 37
Posts: 9,521
Received 846 Likes
on
526 Posts
.......... really?! You seriously think that people all over are saying to consider an Accord instead is not a valid argument against this car? How much Honda kool-aid did you drink this morning? No one goes to look at a Lexus LS and leaves thinking "You know what, I'll get an Avalon instead."
The Lexus LS is a class above the RLX. While the Avalon is supposedly to be above the Accord, it seems like the Accord would also be a nice alternative while being thousands of dollars cheaper.
The correct question would be "Why do you think people compare the RLX to the Accord, but no one compares the Lexus LS 460 to the Toyota Camry, or the Audi A8 to the VW Passat?"
My point is that there's not that much of a difference between Acura's flagship RLX and the Accord.
Is there much of a difference between Lexus' flagship LS 460 and the Toyota Camry (or Avalon)? Is there much of a difference between Audi's flagship A8 and the VW Passat? Is there much of a difference between BMW's flagship 7 series and.... (what's the equivalent of the Honda Accord... the Mini Clubman)?
I'll even throw this one out there... Is there much of a difference between Hyundai's flagship Equus and the Hyundai Sonata?
What you should be asking is:
Does the Camry V6 XLE make the Lexus LS 460 seem like it's not worth the money?
Does the VW Passat V6 SEL make the Audi A8 seem like it's not worth the money?
Does the Hyundai Sonata Limited 2.0T make the Hyundai Equus seem like it's not worth the money?
Does the Mini Clubman make the BMW 7 series seem like it's not worth the money?
See what I'm doing here guys? I'm comparing a company's luxury flagship to their non-luxury brand's top model (or Accord equivalent).
The RLX isn't a "bad" car. It's just not a car that I would want to own if I was shopping for a luxury flagship. And a lot of people seem to agree based on sales #s
My point is that there's not that much of a difference between Acura's flagship RLX and the Accord.
Is there much of a difference between Lexus' flagship LS 460 and the Toyota Camry (or Avalon)? Is there much of a difference between Audi's flagship A8 and the VW Passat? Is there much of a difference between BMW's flagship 7 series and.... (what's the equivalent of the Honda Accord... the Mini Clubman)?
I'll even throw this one out there... Is there much of a difference between Hyundai's flagship Equus and the Hyundai Sonata?
What you should be asking is:
Does the Camry V6 XLE make the Lexus LS 460 seem like it's not worth the money?
Does the VW Passat V6 SEL make the Audi A8 seem like it's not worth the money?
Does the Hyundai Sonata Limited 2.0T make the Hyundai Equus seem like it's not worth the money?
Does the Mini Clubman make the BMW 7 series seem like it's not worth the money?
See what I'm doing here guys? I'm comparing a company's luxury flagship to their non-luxury brand's top model (or Accord equivalent).
The RLX isn't a "bad" car. It's just not a car that I would want to own if I was shopping for a luxury flagship. And a lot of people seem to agree based on sales #s
You see, you have been mentioned the likes of A8, LS, 7 series, and Equus. These are cars that are positioned above the RLX.
It's also interesting to note that, the likes of Passat, Camry, and Sonata, are not quite as good as the existing Accord Touring.
As such, I totally understand the reasoning behind people drawing parallels between the Accord Touring and RLX. The Accord Touring being a very nicely appointed car and is nearly the best, if not the best in class in terms of performance, handling, materials, quality, reliability, styling, and feature content. Heck, it almost seems like Honda did way too well on the Accord!
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the RLX is the best in class. It's far from that (pricing, styling). On the other hand, I just feel that there are areas where the RLX is competitive in (performance, handling), and there are areas where it does really well (interior quality). I mentioned that the pricing and styling are the key problems for the RLX. But upon reading your post, it seems like another issue is that the RLX is only a competitor to the likes of E Class, 5-series, A6, XTS, GS, etc. However, when people mention the word, flagship, they automatically refer to S Class, 7-series, A8, LS, etc. Clearly, the RLX is not quite at that level, and I have a feeling that this fact makes the RLX seems worse than it really is.
Lastly, another problem that popped up in my mind is that, so far, we have only seen the RLX FWD trim. I personally feel that's a stupid move by not launching the real deal first, the eSH-AWD version of the RLX. Just imagine BMW launching 528i only for the first year, or Audi launching 2.0T FWD, orMercedes launching E350 only. Acura's strategy took away the "WOW" factor. If Acura launched the RLX AWD first, people wouldn't be comparing that to the Accord at all. Does the Accord makes 370+hp? No. Does the Accord make 370+hp while getting 30mpg in the city? No. Does the Accord have AWD? No. After the launch of the AWD model, then Acura can simply introduce the FWD version as the volume trim.
#4412
Sure you can. It won't be 100% exact, but they'll be very close.
Accord Touring (with Navi) is $34,270 (MSRP). RLX with Navi is $51,845 (MSRP). What does that extra $17,575 buy you?
Going down the list of features, the most notable differences I can see are:
Everything else (MPG, passenger room, cargo space, safety features, comfort and convenience features, etc) seems to be the same. Are those extra features on the RLX really worth that extra $17,575?
$17,575 can buy a lot of upgrades for the Accord with plenty of change to spare.
Then why does Honda offer 19" wheels as part of their HFP package?
Noise is higher at WOT, but not by much at idle and cruising at 70 MPH (per Car and Driver)
Accord vs RLX sound level:
From reviews, harshness seems to be the same between the Accord and RLX.
Accord Touring (with Navi) is $34,270 (MSRP). RLX with Navi is $51,845 (MSRP). What does that extra $17,575 buy you?
Going down the list of features, the most notable differences I can see are:
- 32 extra HP (RLX: 3.5 liter V6 310 HP vs Accord: 3.5 liter V6 278 HP)
- 20 lb ft more torque (RLX: 272 @ 4500 rpm vs Accord : 252 @ 4900 rpm)
- P-AWS
- 4-wheel independent double-wishbone front and multi-link rear suspension system (RLX) vs MacPherson Strut Front Suspension and Multi-Link Rear Suspension (Accord)
- better audio system (RLX: ELS Premium Audio System with 10 speakers vs Accord: 360-Watt AM/FM/CD Premium Audio System with 7 Speakers, including Subwoofer)
- 18" wheels vs 17" wheels
- SportShift paddle shifters
- 12-way power seat vs 10 way
- LED-illuminated door handles
- Driver's knee airbag
- better materials
- shorter 70–0 mph braking distance (RLX: 166 ft vs Accord: 178 ft)
- premium fuel
- Acura badge
Everything else (MPG, passenger room, cargo space, safety features, comfort and convenience features, etc) seems to be the same. Are those extra features on the RLX really worth that extra $17,575?
$17,575 can buy a lot of upgrades for the Accord with plenty of change to spare.
Then why does Honda offer 19" wheels as part of their HFP package?
Noise is higher at WOT, but not by much at idle and cruising at 70 MPH (per Car and Driver)
Accord vs RLX sound level:
Idle: 39 vs 38
WOT: 83 vs 73
70 MPH: 71 vs 68
WOT: 83 vs 73
70 MPH: 71 vs 68
From reviews, harshness seems to be the same between the Accord and RLX.
23mpg tested edmunds fuel economic for RLX.
http://www.edmunds.com/acura/rlx/201...st-specs1.html
17mpg Accord V6 fuel economic. It shows RLX engine is more fuel efficient in spirited driving.
http://www.edmunds.com/honda/accord/...st-specs1.html
BMW charges $500 for paddles shifters. One up size rim/tire is around $1500. upgraded Audio is atleast $2k. I think the Glass used in RLX is more thicker so better insulation for heat. better exterior paint.
Upgraded material and seats. another $2k. longer warranty, dealer ship experiance. PAWS
http://www.hondanews.com/channels/ac...-rlx-press-kit
The RLX's available retractable door mirrors can be configured to automatically retract when the doors are locked, and then automatically extend when the doors are unlocked. Multi-angle rearview camera with dynamic guidelines uses active guidelines that curve, displaying the amount of steering wheel input on the display to aid in backup maneuvers
#4413
I drive a Subata.
iTrader: (1)
Eat before you talk son
The following 2 users liked this post by JS + XES:
Ken1997TL (10-26-2013),
Sly Raskal (10-30-2013)
#4414
Senior Moderator
I am not certain why trying to have a discussion would result in being asked how much Honda kool-aid did I drink.
The Lexus LS is a class above the RLX. While the Avalon is supposedly to be above the Accord, it seems like the Accord would also be a nice alternative while being thousands of dollars cheaper.
It seems like the problem is that Acura's flagship is not exactly at the same class as the other flagships.
You see, you have been mentioned the likes of A8, LS, 7 series, and Equus. These are cars that are positioned above the RLX.
It's also interesting to note that, the likes of Passat, Camry, and Sonata, are not quite as good as the existing Accord Touring.
As such, I totally understand the reasoning behind people drawing parallels between the Accord Touring and RLX. The Accord Touring being a very nicely appointed car and is nearly the best, if not the best in class in terms of performance, handling, materials, quality, reliability, styling, and feature content. Heck, it almost seems like Honda did way too well on the Accord!
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the RLX is the best in class. It's far from that (pricing, styling). On the other hand, I just feel that there are areas where the RLX is competitive in (performance, handling), and there are areas where it does really well (interior quality). I mentioned that the pricing and styling are the key problems for the RLX. But upon reading your post, it seems like another issue is that the RLX is only a competitor to the likes of E Class, 5-series, A6, XTS, GS, etc. However, when people mention the word, flagship, they automatically refer to S Class, 7-series, A8, LS, etc. Clearly, the RLX is not quite at that level, and I have a feeling that this fact makes the RLX seems worse than it really is.
Lastly, another problem that popped up in my mind is that, so far, we have only seen the RLX FWD trim. I personally feel that's a stupid move by not launching the real deal first, the eSH-AWD version of the RLX. Just imagine BMW launching 528i only for the first year, or Audi launching 2.0T FWD, orMercedes launching E350 only. Acura's strategy took away the "WOW" factor. If Acura launched the RLX AWD first, people wouldn't be comparing that to the Accord at all. Does the Accord makes 370+hp? No. Does the Accord make 370+hp while getting 30mpg in the city? No. Does the Accord have AWD? No. After the launch of the AWD model, then Acura can simply introduce the FWD version as the volume trim.
The Lexus LS is a class above the RLX. While the Avalon is supposedly to be above the Accord, it seems like the Accord would also be a nice alternative while being thousands of dollars cheaper.
It seems like the problem is that Acura's flagship is not exactly at the same class as the other flagships.
You see, you have been mentioned the likes of A8, LS, 7 series, and Equus. These are cars that are positioned above the RLX.
It's also interesting to note that, the likes of Passat, Camry, and Sonata, are not quite as good as the existing Accord Touring.
As such, I totally understand the reasoning behind people drawing parallels between the Accord Touring and RLX. The Accord Touring being a very nicely appointed car and is nearly the best, if not the best in class in terms of performance, handling, materials, quality, reliability, styling, and feature content. Heck, it almost seems like Honda did way too well on the Accord!
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the RLX is the best in class. It's far from that (pricing, styling). On the other hand, I just feel that there are areas where the RLX is competitive in (performance, handling), and there are areas where it does really well (interior quality). I mentioned that the pricing and styling are the key problems for the RLX. But upon reading your post, it seems like another issue is that the RLX is only a competitor to the likes of E Class, 5-series, A6, XTS, GS, etc. However, when people mention the word, flagship, they automatically refer to S Class, 7-series, A8, LS, etc. Clearly, the RLX is not quite at that level, and I have a feeling that this fact makes the RLX seems worse than it really is.
Lastly, another problem that popped up in my mind is that, so far, we have only seen the RLX FWD trim. I personally feel that's a stupid move by not launching the real deal first, the eSH-AWD version of the RLX. Just imagine BMW launching 528i only for the first year, or Audi launching 2.0T FWD, orMercedes launching E350 only. Acura's strategy took away the "WOW" factor. If Acura launched the RLX AWD first, people wouldn't be comparing that to the Accord at all. Does the Accord makes 370+hp? No. Does the Accord make 370+hp while getting 30mpg in the city? No. Does the Accord have AWD? No. After the launch of the AWD model, then Acura can simply introduce the FWD version as the volume trim.
(that and WTF were they thinking by giving the car so little headroom)
#4415
3dba is big difference in NVH.
23mpg tested edmunds fuel economic for RLX.
http://www.edmunds.com/acura/rlx/201...st-specs1.html
17mpg Accord V6 fuel economic. It shows RLX engine is more fuel efficient in spirited driving.
http://www.edmunds.com/honda/accord/...st-specs1.html
BMW charges $500 for paddles shifters. One up size rim/tire is around $1500. upgraded Audio is atleast $2k. I think the Glass used in RLX is more thicker so better insulation for heat. better exterior paint.
Upgraded material and seats. another $2k. longer warranty, dealer ship experiance. PAWS
http://www.hondanews.com/channels/ac...-rlx-press-kit
The RLX's available retractable door mirrors can be configured to automatically retract when the doors are locked, and then automatically extend when the doors are unlocked. Multi-angle rearview camera with dynamic guidelines uses active guidelines that curve, displaying the amount of steering wheel input on the display to aid in backup maneuvers
23mpg tested edmunds fuel economic for RLX.
http://www.edmunds.com/acura/rlx/201...st-specs1.html
17mpg Accord V6 fuel economic. It shows RLX engine is more fuel efficient in spirited driving.
http://www.edmunds.com/honda/accord/...st-specs1.html
BMW charges $500 for paddles shifters. One up size rim/tire is around $1500. upgraded Audio is atleast $2k. I think the Glass used in RLX is more thicker so better insulation for heat. better exterior paint.
Upgraded material and seats. another $2k. longer warranty, dealer ship experiance. PAWS
http://www.hondanews.com/channels/ac...-rlx-press-kit
The RLX's available retractable door mirrors can be configured to automatically retract when the doors are locked, and then automatically extend when the doors are unlocked. Multi-angle rearview camera with dynamic guidelines uses active guidelines that curve, displaying the amount of steering wheel input on the display to aid in backup maneuvers
$17,575 savings over RLX
- $500 (paddle shifters)
- $900 ($1500 for up sized rim/tire - $600 for sale of stock rim/tire)
- $2000 (audio upgrade)
- $300 (window tint)
- $2000 (upgraded materials and seats)
- $800 (Honda Care extended warranty)
- $70 (opti coat)
- $1000 (power folding mirrors imported from Asia)
- $1000 (sound damping materials)
__________________________________
$9,005 savings over RLX
Now the only major difference is P-AWS and an Acura badge.
$9,005 buys a lot of gas.
The following users liked this post:
ttribe (10-26-2013)
#4416
Senior Moderator
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Better Neighborhood, Arizona
Posts: 45,641
Received 2,329 Likes
on
1,309 Posts
.......... really?! You seriously think that people all over are saying to consider an Accord instead is not a valid argument against this car? How much Honda kool-aid did you drink this morning? No one goes to look at a Lexus LS and leaves thinking "You know what, I'll get an Avalon instead."
Why? Because the Accord is that damn good. I also subjectively think the Accord is about the best looking sedan out there for the money too.
#4417
If people are saying the RLX is a dressed up Accord, what are people going to say when the TLX comes out? Where is Acura going to go with it? Naturally, they'll need to make the TLX better than the Accord, but it can't be too good as to intrude into the RLX's territory otherwise they'll cannibalize sales again like they did with the 4G TL and the 2G RL.
How is Acura going to distinguish the TLX from the Accord Touring and the RLX?
Price: It's a given the TLX will be priced under the RLX and above the Accord Touring. The Accord Touring is roughly $34K and the RLX starts at roughly $49K. The current TL starts at roughly $39K. That means the new TLX will probably start at around $40K.
Engine: What engine would you get for $40K? They can't put an engine in that's better than the RLX's 3.5 liter direct injected V6. At the same time, it would be going backwards and dumb to put in an engine that's worse than the 3.5 liter non-direct injected V6 in the Accord Touring and the current TL. Will they re-use the 3.7 liter V6 in the TL SH-AWD? What other engine choices do they have? This wouldn't be a problem if Acura had a V8 or turbocharged V6 for the RLX.
Performance: If you look at the performance numbers (0-60, 0-100, rolling start, quarter mile, etc), the Accord V6 and the RLX are roughly identical. It would make no sense (IMO) for the TLX to have better performance than the flagship RLX. At the same time, it would make no sense for the TLX to perform worse than the RLX and the Accord Touring. Will they keep the TLX's performance #s the same as the RLX and Accord Touring then?
Interior space: On paper, the Accord and the RLX have the same amount of passenger volume, head room, leg room, hip room, shoulder room, and cargo volume. Will the TLX have more, less, or the same amount of interior space? Logically, it wouldn't make sense for it to have more space than their flagship RLX, right? That means it'll either have the same amount of space or less.
Tech: The tech in the Accord Touring and the RLX are different, but not by a whole lot. What kind of tech is the TLX going to have? Again, it logically wouldn't make sense for the TLX to have more/better tech than the flagship RLX. So Acura's options are slightly less tech than the RLX but more than the Accord Touring, or the same tech as the RLX.
I don't know if I'd pay $40K for a TLX which on paper will have an engine and performance that's the same as a $34K Accord and $49K RLX, interior space that may be less than or equal to the Accord and RLX, and tech that's somewhere in the middle of the Accord Touring and RLX.
Acura have painted themselves into a corner.
#4418
Even though they were older models, I've owned a Accord and a Acura TL of roughly the same year model. The level of materials and workmanship on the Acura is superior. Not taking anything away from the Accord but these vehicles are not equal. But they are similar and it's up to each of us to decide if the difference is worth the extra. Which is what a luxury is all about.
#4419
Moderator
Even though they were older models, I've owned a Accord and a Acura TL of roughly the same year model. The level of materials and workmanship on the Acura is superior. Not taking anything away from the Accord but these vehicles are not equal. But they are similar and it's up to each of us to decide if the difference is worth the extra. Which is what a luxury is all about.
#4420
$17,575 savings over RLX
- $500 (paddle shifters)
- $900 ($1500 for up sized rim/tire - $600 for sale of stock rim/tire)
- $2000 (audio upgrade)
- $300 (window tint)
- $2000 (upgraded materials and seats)
- $800 (Honda Care extended warranty)
- $70 (opti coat)
- $1000 (power folding mirrors imported from Asia)
- $1000 (sound damping materials)
__________________________________
$9,005 savings over RLX
Now the only major difference is P-AWS and an Acura badge.
$9,005 buys a lot of gas.
- $500 (paddle shifters)
- $900 ($1500 for up sized rim/tire - $600 for sale of stock rim/tire)
- $2000 (audio upgrade)
- $300 (window tint)
- $2000 (upgraded materials and seats)
- $800 (Honda Care extended warranty)
- $70 (opti coat)
- $1000 (power folding mirrors imported from Asia)
- $1000 (sound damping materials)
__________________________________
$9,005 savings over RLX
Now the only major difference is P-AWS and an Acura badge.
$9,005 buys a lot of gas.
The previous 2012 RL each rim retail for $660.
http://estore.honda.com/acura/parts/...++18&dl=251100
YOu excluded Double wish bone suspension cost. (Think about Accord turning radius if it has same wheel base same width tires as RLX) $2500 for DI engine. better LED head lights. Extended warranty from Honda will not give you loaner cars from Honda dealer on same level. maybe give you Toyota corrolla rental. Thinner windows cannot keep indoor cool.
Germans charge $500 to $1000 for upgraded Paint.
Think about Acura TSX. It lacks push button start, DI engine, LED lights, V6, whole bunch of electronics and still it cost $34.5K. the same as Accord V6 Touring. If you remove all those things from Accord touring. Your basic 4 cylinder EX Accord is some where $25k. deduct $2.5K of DI earth dream engine & $500 for push button start from EX Accord. your at $22k.
Now add back ELS stero, upgraded material and double wish bone suspension to Accord EX. These 3 things alone cost $12k. I am not even going into upsize rim package. that will make 4 cylinder TSX around $36k.
#4421
An 07 Acura vs 09 Accord...the Acura was a better car. I doubt that Honda would improve the Accord that much and he Acura not improve!
#4422
Moderator
#4423
Senior Moderator
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Better Neighborhood, Arizona
Posts: 45,641
Received 2,329 Likes
on
1,309 Posts
The problem with Acura is this: They're experiencing 2002 all over again. Just as then, the Accord is a better car than the TL and this time, the Accord is a great looking car. The '03 Accord was a fantastic value and a great vehicle, but with odd styling bordering ugly.
The upcoming TLX might be a great car but Honda is REALLY going to need to beat the Accord tremendously to make people pay the extra money.
I'd say that would be my two cents, but I've owned Accords, TL's, TSX's and RL's. I've been there, done that. It'll take a fantastic job from Acura to prove me wrong and as a shareholder, I hope they do!
#4424
I drive a Subata.
iTrader: (1)
#4425
Every single response thus far has been the RLX is ugly and the Accord is a great buy for the money. I rest my case. Fact of the matter is, the Accord is a great buy compared to most vehicles but that doesn't actually make it better than the RLX in anything except that all too common and relative looks department.
fsttyms1, you can lob whatever label you like at me, the general consensus here is of the if I don't think it's great I'll just throw out hyperbolic insults type. Fact is I wouldn't buy the car either at the price they want and I am not impressed with most of what Acura is making these days but that doesn't mean I go around whining on forums about it or call the RLX a bad car when it really isn't.
fsttyms1, you can lob whatever label you like at me, the general consensus here is of the if I don't think it's great I'll just throw out hyperbolic insults type. Fact is I wouldn't buy the car either at the price they want and I am not impressed with most of what Acura is making these days but that doesn't mean I go around whining on forums about it or call the RLX a bad car when it really isn't.
#4426
Every single response thus far has been the RLX is ugly and the Accord is a great buy for the money. I rest my case. Fact of the matter is, the Accord is a great buy compared to most vehicles but that doesn't actually make it better than the RLX in anything except that all too common and relative looks department.
fsttyms1, you can lob whatever label you like at me, the general consensus here is of the if I don't think it's great I'll just throw out hyperbolic insults type. Fact is I wouldn't buy the car either at the price they want and I am not impressed with most of what Acura is making these days but that doesn't mean I go around whining on forums about it or call the RLX a bad car when it really isn't.
fsttyms1, you can lob whatever label you like at me, the general consensus here is of the if I don't think it's great I'll just throw out hyperbolic insults type. Fact is I wouldn't buy the car either at the price they want and I am not impressed with most of what Acura is making these days but that doesn't mean I go around whining on forums about it or call the RLX a bad car when it really isn't.
While these are all true, it doesn't make the RLX a bad car, and outside of Consumer Reports, the publications agree. They all say the RLX is a solid car with good mechanicals and a great interior, it just doesn't stand out in any way. It's a good car in a field of great cars, and that's it's biggest shortcoming. It also hurts the RLX that Acura just doesn't have the brand prestige of the Germans.
#4427
Every single response thus far has been the RLX is ugly and the Accord is a great buy for the money. I rest my case. Fact of the matter is, the Accord is a great buy compared to most vehicles but that doesn't actually make it better than the RLX in anything except that all too common and relative looks department.
I don't think a single person has said the RLX is straight up ugly, and this guy is saying we ALL think it's ugly
Very few people want a bland $60k car, and the RL sales numbers showed that... and that was only $50k.
#4428
Senior Moderator
Every single response thus far has been the RLX is ugly and the Accord is a great buy for the money. I rest my case. Fact of the matter is, the Accord is a great buy compared to most vehicles but that doesn't actually make it better than the RLX in anything except that all too common and relative looks department.
fsttyms1, you can lob whatever label you like at me, the general consensus here is of the if I don't think it's great I'll just throw out hyperbolic insults type. Fact is I wouldn't buy the car either at the price they want and I am not impressed with most of what Acura is making these days but that doesn't mean I go around whining on forums about it or call the RLX a bad car when it really isn't.
fsttyms1, you can lob whatever label you like at me, the general consensus here is of the if I don't think it's great I'll just throw out hyperbolic insults type. Fact is I wouldn't buy the car either at the price they want and I am not impressed with most of what Acura is making these days but that doesn't mean I go around whining on forums about it or call the RLX a bad car when it really isn't.
Ok, you wouldnt buy the car either. What is your problem then. Because many speak out on their dislike for it? You are going around whining about us (as you put it) whining so what is the difference? You are going around on the forum complaining about us. Pot Kettle Black ?????
We all know Acura has the capability to make a great car, inside and out, performance and design. What we are all hoping for is that they pull their heads out of wherever they are and come out with some WoW factor... Get us and others interested in the brand again and give us something that gets noticed......In a good way! That is all we want.
Last edited by fsttyms1; 10-27-2013 at 07:23 PM.
#4429
Moderator
#4430
The Accord is a family sedan the TL even though it may share a lot of the same parts...is not a family sedan. It's no different that saying a Chevy Impala is the same as a Cadillac ATS.
#4431
Senior Moderator
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Better Neighborhood, Arizona
Posts: 45,641
Received 2,329 Likes
on
1,309 Posts
The Accord is a newer design, offering several features the TL doesn't even have. Those ARE factual.
#4432
The 2013 TL, Acura's performance luxury sedan, has been named "Best Upscale Midsize Car for Families" by U.S. News & World Report in its 2013 "Best Cars for Families" awards.
"The Acura TL offers the ideal blend of performance, comfort and safety, resulting in a luxury sedan that's a smart choice for families," said Mike Accavitti, Acura vice president of national marketing operations. "The TL provides parents with the performance they desire in a luxury sedan paired with a well-appointed interior, top safety ratings, a host of standard Acura technologies and spacious second row seating that is ideal for clients and children."
The "Best Cars for Families" awards combine quality, size and family-friendly features into a composite score. Quality is measured using a weighted average of scores from the U.S. News rankings at the time the awards are published. The rankings compare cars on the basis of safety, reliability and a consensus of automotive critics' opinions. Size is based on a vehicle's seating capacity and interior space. For family-friendly features, U.S. News factors in the availability of features deemed to be helpful to families by its editors.
http://www.acura.com/PressReleaseArt...013&id=7119-en
"The Acura TL offers the ideal blend of performance, comfort and safety, resulting in a luxury sedan that's a smart choice for families," said Mike Accavitti, Acura vice president of national marketing operations. "The TL provides parents with the performance they desire in a luxury sedan paired with a well-appointed interior, top safety ratings, a host of standard Acura technologies and spacious second row seating that is ideal for clients and children."
The "Best Cars for Families" awards combine quality, size and family-friendly features into a composite score. Quality is measured using a weighted average of scores from the U.S. News rankings at the time the awards are published. The rankings compare cars on the basis of safety, reliability and a consensus of automotive critics' opinions. Size is based on a vehicle's seating capacity and interior space. For family-friendly features, U.S. News factors in the availability of features deemed to be helpful to families by its editors.
http://www.acura.com/PressReleaseArt...013&id=7119-en
#4434
Moderator
#4435
I drive a Subata.
iTrader: (1)
On last Saturday, I went to check out Lexus GS350 F-sport. The fully loaded one was $58k. Anyone with a properly functioning brain would choose GS over RLX.
Take off the price tag and competition, RLX is not a bad car. But then, what's the point of that?
Take off the price tag and competition, RLX is not a bad car. But then, what's the point of that?
#4436
Haters, all of you.
#4438
No, we arent saying its ugly, we are saying from a styling standpoint its Bland, the car for the most part is unimpressive and there isnt that much that makes it stand out from the Accord which leads to why spend the 20k premium on the RLX when you can have 95% of it with the Accord.
Ok, you wouldnt buy the car either. What is your problem then. Because many speak out on their dislike for it? You are going around whining about us (as you put it) whining so what is the difference? You are going around on the forum complaining about us. Pot Kettle Black ?????
We all know Acura has the capability to make a great car, inside and out, performance and design. What we are all hoping for is that they pull their heads out of wherever they are and come out with some WoW factor... Get us and others interested in the brand again and give us something that gets noticed......In a good way! That is all we want.
Ok, you wouldnt buy the car either. What is your problem then. Because many speak out on their dislike for it? You are going around whining about us (as you put it) whining so what is the difference? You are going around on the forum complaining about us. Pot Kettle Black ?????
We all know Acura has the capability to make a great car, inside and out, performance and design. What we are all hoping for is that they pull their heads out of wherever they are and come out with some WoW factor... Get us and others interested in the brand again and give us something that gets noticed......In a good way! That is all we want.
Pot kettle black? Logical fallacy, but then this whole "discussion" is pretty far from logical.
Last edited by AZP-TL; 10-28-2013 at 02:23 PM.
#4439
I drive a Subata.
iTrader: (1)
You are saying it's a bland and overpriced car that offers nothing over the Accord, that is simply not true. Others are saying it doesn't compare to BMWs or Mercedes, that is not true, it's comparable at its price point for what you are getting. Still others are making claims that it has bad characteristics that don't actually exist. Ultimately what you are doing is expecting more for less because of brand image.
Pot kettle black? Logical fallacy, but then this whole "discussion" is pretty far from logical.
Pot kettle black? Logical fallacy, but then this whole "discussion" is pretty far from logical.
You are one of them.