fsttyms1

ttribe

What is it you see that exemplifies "cognitive dissonance", in your opinion?

charliemike

That he thinks something and you do not and therefore there's dissonance between your cognition

Costco

You're preaching to the choir. If I had the money I wouldn't buy the respective BMW or MB competitors either That thing is I don't matter, because 5,000 people will buy an E-Class every month when Acura can't even manage to sell 1,000 RLs in the same span.

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.

JS + XES

iTrader: (1)

Learn to read.

iforyou

iTrader: (1)

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?

MeehowsBRZ

.......... 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."

H_CAR

I 100% agree with this post.

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.

The LS is a different story. It's much more expensive than the RLX. Like mentioned the Accord argument works for many other cars.

I'm not going to deny the RLX needs some work, but it really isn't as horrible as everyone thinks.

AZuser

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

JS + XES

iTrader: (1)

Didn't even know a brand new FWD RLX loaded with options is +$60k.

Holy balls.

iforyou

iTrader: (1)

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.

SSFTSX

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

JS + XES

iTrader: (1)

Eat before you talk son

fsttyms1

Thats NOT the point though. The point is is its Acura's Flag ship car, and it is TOO similar to the accord. You can get 95% of the RLX with the Accord for 20-25k less. There just isnt enough to set it apart as far as Hondas Luxury brand (Acura) vs the Accord. Couple that with Bland styling and a front end that still elicits negative feedback from most and you have an unsuccessful recipe for a Flagship car.

(that and WTF were they thinking by giving the car so little headroom)

AZuser

$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.

Ken1997TL

Heh, I was thinking of buying an RLX or TLX, but I bought an Accord EX-L Navi 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.

AZuser

It would certainly help and be nice if the RLX was in the same class as the other flagships but as stated by fsttyms1, Acura's problem is the RLX isn't leaps and bounds better than the Accord. Honda made the Accord too good. It's like the right hand doesn't know what the left hand is doing.

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.

08Acura13

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.

ttribe

You're talking about "older models"; things change and in this case, Honda has improved while Acura has remained nearly stagnant. Thus, the gap is now much more narrow than it once was.

SSFTSX

So you can sell your Accord tires and rims for $600 and buy RLX tires & noise reducing rim package for $1500. Just on tire rack the RLX tires cost close to $300 piece. The Rims on RLX will cost $800 each.
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.

08Acura13

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!

ttribe

[sigh] The facts indicate otherwise, your anecdotal "doubts" notwithstanding.

Ken1997TL

The Accord IS that much better. I just traded in a 2011 TSX wagon for a '13 Accord.

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!

JS + XES

iTrader: (1)

AZP-TL

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.

EhkoXC

It's a losing argument, it really is in this area of the forum. I've never thought the RLX was ugly, I've seen a few in person, and they're decent looking cars they just don't stand out. They also massively miscalculated by not launching the AWD version first, or at least at the same time as the P-AWS version.

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.

Costco

This is exactly the type of kneejerk response that is all too common from the model-specific forum regulars. Not surprised in the least.

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.

fsttyms1

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.

ttribe

If "every single response" says such a thing, it shouldn't be too hard for you to find examples of it to address directly. Otherwise, it seems you are committing the Straw Man fallacy.

08Acura13

I see so your opinions are facts?

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.

Ken1997TL

The Accord is a newer design, offering several features the TL doesn't even have. Those ARE factual.

AZuser

I guess they didn't get the memo.

dom

/Thread.

ttribe

Oh my...talk about knee-jerk reaction...have you read anything in this thread?

JS + XES

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?

CarbonGray Earl

Haters, all of you.

yohan81718

I keep on getting email from Acura dealer about RLX they sell at 10k below MSRP with 0% APR...

AZP-TL

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.

JS + XES

iTrader: (1)

In this thread, I see couple members who can't seem to think logically.

You are one of them.

AZP-TL

Learn to read.