+1

 

if you build a Mercedes/bmw that is comparable with Genesis Sedan 5.0 you will be over $70k...

what is your point?

Mercedes and BMW were never about "value" like Acura. and TL SHAWD does not offer the same "value" anymore. It costs just as much as its competitors.

 

So is someone's AWD cost an addition $4K over another models AWD? That's what happens on their "build me" sites.

My point is like a radio... the damn crap picks up 101.1 FM for all models. Crank the volume to the max, and like most of these cars with AWD, you can't tell a difference.

I not paying $thousands for subtle (i.e., I don't feel) differences.

Go to MBUSA.com or BMWUSA to see the pennies needed to feel the difference in HP.

 

I tend to disagree with that. And if we really want to get into the "cost" word, the true cost to own an Acura in the long run will be dramatically less than its BMW/Merc/Audi correlatives.

 

Actually yes the MB W201 (190E) and it's successor W202/3/4 (C-class) were marketed as the value entry class. The US commercials for the W202 use the word value in them.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yxbc7SjDC74

 

There are a handful of soccer moms in my neighborhood who traded their X5/ML/Range Rover for a MDX for that reason.

 

Not sure what you consider "competitors", but one might consider the Audi A4. Go equip the A4 with options to match the TL, and you are looking at 50K plus. I'm not so sure that the A6 isn't more of a size wise competitor to the TL anyway.

 

Well "IF" they offered a TL-SHAWD with a V8 or Turbo 6 producing 420+ hp (like say genesis R spec/IS-F) and maybe not CTS-V 556 but something more than the mere 305 and kept the price in the upper 40s MAYBE 50-53ish there would be a market. Its not going to sell like the civic but it was never intended to, but its the niche market car that some of the true honda/acura enthusiast are looking for. You dont have to be as big as GM and BMW to do it, especially when you are taking in a larger yearly profit then them.

As for smart luxury direction, they need the products to show that value better than they are They cant just throw in a civic based 20something k and expect it to make the rest of the lineup look like a value because if it. Acura needs to define where each car is segmented in better. All of their cars now are WAY to close in size and really have no separation.

I think Better advertising would go a long way to help too

 

BUT many that buy these NEW 45k+ vehicles dont own them long term. Many are 2-3 year trade in for new, so long term ownership doesnt come into play till its used and 2nd owner. Also many manufacturers are throwing in free maint now so the only thing they have to pay while owning the car is their monthly payment and gas.

 

This is already a circular discussion that cannot go anywhere. I can never understand why people cannot accept that within their business framework, Honda/Acura will never make a car like that (any time soon). They don't have a V-8 or a Turbo 6 and don't see a market for such an engine in 2026 (assumes the expected lifespan of any new engine is ~15 years). Even if they did make one and put it in a TL AWD, people would complain about front overhangs, or that they want RWD or that they're paying 50-60K for an Accord based car.

But this is how it's been throughout their history. Except for NSX and S2000, all the cars that all AZs fans once bought and loved were all based on either the Accord chassis or the Civic chassis. So at the end of the day, H/A (it appears) can only sell the Accord for 'so much' and beyond that people start to say "if I'm paying XXX for a car, I might as well buy YYZZ." It wouldn't matter what they put under the hood so the engine is not the only answer. They would need an all new chassis to go with this and that changes the entire proposition from a (not too) simple engine swap into an all new undertaking.
The entire sedan lineup will be all new by 2014 but till then there is bound to be some overlap. By all accounts, the new Civic chassis is exceptionally rigid and should make an excellent platform for an entry level car. I don't think that they're trying to cast a halo upwards over the whole line with this introduction. Do you really believe that? They're inserting a car into a segment that we no longer have a presence in.

 

I don't think we can expect Acura to release a performance car built from the ground up. But they should have more cars that would attract people in their lineup. Infiniti doesn't have a 400+ HP performance car, but I see the G37 a lot more often than the TL on the road. Their SUVs seem to be their best-selling cars.

Agreed.

 

Very valid point. Though, even to 2nd owner, a used MDX costs about the same a used X3 of the same year/mileage. Around here at least.

 

The only car we've had over the years that was always over $45K is the RL, so just for kicks, I took a look at RL sales. In my career, I've sold 56 RLs. 27 were leased, the rest were cash or finance. This would make it roughly evenly split between the 36-48 month crowd and those that are keeping the car long term. Not trying to say that my sales are representative of ALL RL sales in all regions, but at least in my experience the actual facts are different than the (apparent) assumption.

 

Unfortunately for Acura, your 56 RL sales might account for almost half a year for the whole model nationwide (a little sarcasm there).

 

That's quite interesting. How do you find the split among other vehicles in Acura's lineup? Such as the TL and TSX, being less expensive.

 

If they cannot afford to maintain a X5/ML/Range Rover, then they probably should not have Bought it in the first place.

MDX is probably the best "car" in the whole Honda/Acura lineup right now. everything else oh and Fit is good too.

 

It would take me to write an essay to explain it to you.

Let's just say 2001-2008 TL (include CL) were "value" buys. 4G TL is not.

 

That involves much more counting. But my gut feeling is that these two are leased more than purchased.

 

I agree. Acura needs this type of high power super sedan in the lineup for image building, not for money making; just as the same purpose for the Audi S/RS, BMW M, and MB AMG sedans. All these niche products are excellent marketing tools for boosting both brand name and model images.

Acura had already lost the also-low-volume, non-money-making NSX supercar in sustaining the brand's first "Precision Craft Performance" and now "Advance" images. It is desperately in need of a super sedan or two in order to put the fire back into the Acura lineup and it's brand image.

Even though the RL sales is bad enough, Acura still relentlessly keeps it going. This serves no useful purpose, but only to tarnish the Acura brand name.

On the other hand, even if the hypothetical super sedan is losing money, at least it can build up the Acura image, and is purpose well served.

 

Nope, all can afford it they just can't see the value of a vehicle that needs repairs on a regular basis. Add in the fact that driving to and from the dealership for repairs takes up time in their hectic lives. There's a lot of inconvience involved with unreliable vehicles. I watched that with a neighbor who is a widower and has three kids, used to own a A8 which he traded for a MDX also.

Life's to short to be spent waiting for unreliable vehicles to be repaired.

 

My friend bought a Audi A5 last year. It's funny that so far, I have seen him driving an A4 twice already as his courtesy car.......

 

I find it hilarious that in the last three years of ownership, I've taken my Avant in for routine maintenance and only needed minor issues resolved and my car has only depreciated 6K in three years of ownership. Stark difference compared to my CL-S in terms of maintenance and warranty work that was needed.



For every n happy owners there's always one unhappy owner that cries louder than the n happy owners. I know more people that have had issues with Acuras than Audis and that's not just because more people own an Acura or Honda, it's because in the 8 years Honda and Acura's incident rates for recalls has been steadily increasing.

 

Not everyone has the same experiences.

4 years of Odyssey ownership:
- New tranny
- New torque Convertor
- New Rear bushings
- New power Steering fluid reservoir
- New power steering fluid pump
- 2 visits for transmission software updates
- ABS Issue recall

2.5 years of VW Rabbit ownership:
- 4 oil changes
- (Edit) Fuel line recall

 

Maybe he had his car in for routine maintenance and they gave him a loaner. I've had my car for almost 3 years and 21k miles now and I've only had to bring it in for scheduled maintenance.

 

Big

All I know is my last 2 Honda products(04 TSX, 07 Ody) have been the most unreliable vehicles I've ever owned.

 

Most Audi's tend to need constant attention starting at around the end of the 4-yr mark right when the factory warranty is about to expire. That's why I always tell people to buy the longest extended warranty possible.

Over the years, Audi reliability has been greatly improved. But it's still no where close to the same level as the top Japanese makes such as Toyota and Honda.

My '97 A4 was absolutely poor in reliability, with which the engine warning light would turn on every time I took it out on a long trip. Even though extended warranty had taken care of it, but the frequent trips to the dealership were very tiring indeed. The extended warranty cost had pay for itself more than 2 times over for the period of keeping this car 7.5 years.

My '05 A6 is a lot better in reliability, but it still needed door lock module replacement, HID bulbs replacement, A/C air mixing valve replacement, rear cam seal replacement, and tranny replacement 2 times. Believe me, I would rather have a reliable car, than wanting to see my extended warranty starting to pay itself off.

 

The fact that this has debated so much, and for so long, is the issue for VW/Audi/Germany's reputation. Regardless of what they're doing or are trying to do, it'll take years for them to earn a reputation better than Honda's for reliability. Likewise, even if Honda were to completely revamp their lineup, it would still take them years to establish a reputation of building exciting vehicles.

 

The interesting thing is that when Audi had a 2 year warranty, the same was true. At 2 years, 1 month, it went to hell in a hand basket. So the optimist would say "see, they're getting better" while the conspiracy theorist would say it's all part of their money making scheme.

 

Geeze, I had no idea they had a 2 year warranty at one point, talk about not believing in your own product.

 

so I was poking around the ACURA website and the SE is no longer in the future vehicles section, does this mean it isn't going to happen at all?

 

Its already under the 2012 TSX section on their site.

 

o wow the SE options are just as dissapointing as everyone said they would be...

 

Not very expensive though for what you get with it. I wouldn't want it because it looks like you can't get it with the tech package.

 

Also, it doesn't matter what each of us says here....there is enough data out there to what cars are reliable..and what cars are not as reliable.

 

Message me when you finish the essay explaining YOUR OPINION!

 

So based on your experience, are you never buying a Honda/Acura product again.

Based on my personal experience of owning several VW products(most unreliable vehicles I've ever owned), it would be very hard for me to ever even consider owning another. I might lease, but at this moment, VW products are still way too questionable for me to ever own.

 

I would never paint an entire manufacturer with the same brush, and its pretty obvious Honda still makes very reliable cars. So yes I would consider another Honda product. But this Ody in particular has left a really bad taste in my mouth compared to my previous bullet proof Honda products.

I chalk up the TSX issues to being a first year build. 05 onwards have been very reliable IIRC. The Ody was in its 3rd year, so no excuses.

 

The 2G (2001-2003) TL's was "value" buys IF they had a properly designed transmission, but they didn't.

Simply go and take a peek inside the main 2G TL sub-forum, and try to realize how many threads there are dealing with 2G owners having problems with their shitty trannies.

 

Acura TSX V6 in comparison test. 0-100mph and fuel economic is identical to 2013 BMW 328 sport. Despite bing 200lbs heavier, wider, taller with 5speed auto and on all season tires.
TSX is truly most aerodynamic car.
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/.../bmw_328i.html

 

^ Yet the BMW still takes first place and the TSX is in 6th place. What's your point?