|
Originally Posted by Maximized
Well i am sure you have a better background than chiawei, but again it is your opinion. You don't have any figures to verify the cost of implementing a new V8 into the RL. I feel it is feasible to have a V8 in the just the RL, but again the cost of the vehicle would have to be raised in order for Honda/Acura to be profitable in the venture.
Just because he worked for honda for 1+ year in his life DOES NOT MEAN his word is Gospel. I am not claiming that honda would set back 10+ year like he claimed by developing V8 nor the cost of developing V8 would be lessened by sharing of platform. All i am stating is that in order for honda to make a dent in the premium market, it must have a V8. I stated that Honda has V8/V10 capabilities, because it does have ability as shown by its racing program. I am not involved in Honda Corporate business decision. I am just venting that so far the decision it has made by not offering a V8 is hurting the brand. I really fail to see where my comments needs to be backed up by internal honda documentation. I never claimed that honda would make money by offering V8 only in the RL. But it is already shown in the market place by honda's two competitor out of its own country what a V8 brought to those brands. Justin who ever he is can claim anything he wants, and when truth are presented he needs to jump up and down and drag the post to neverland. This is ridiculous. I still do not see where he has come back with a sharing of platform has to do with toyota V8. I don't see where Toyota has tons of chassis when the V8 was introduced. This thread turn into hell because someone who is a honda loyalist wanted to defend the brand to the end by twisting numbers and making false statement. When being rebutted gone crazy and drag the post to different areas. |
Originally Posted by chiawei
One more.
On false information #4. You are so wrong and full of it. The 2.8 L6 started life as 2.5L with 192 HP, it was detuned to 170 HP and used on 323i. It was stroked to 2.8L on use with E39 and I was mistaken in listed it as 192, because I had forgot that there was another change in 1999. In 1997 to 1999 is was 190HP. Later increased to 193. Where is the 184HP???????? From your imagination? The 184 HP debuts in 2001 when double vanos was introduced in the L6, the 525i developed 184HP, and 225 for the 3.0 L6. FALSE INFORMATION??? How much longer do you want to really want to make yourself look like a fool. Let's say for the sake of the argument that he was wrong. Why are you getting so angry? You don't like the RL or what Acura did with it, or whatever the case may be- fine, but is there another point other than your disappointment which you have made very clear? Were you planning on purchasing the RL or something? If you have enough money to consider purchasing something in that price bracket than surely you have something better to do with your time than get heated on an Acura forum. |
Originally Posted by chiawei
I am not claiming that honda would set back 10+ year like he claimed by developing V8 nor the cost of developing V8 would be lessened by sharing of platform. All i am stating is that in order for honda to make a dent in the premium market, it must have a V8. I stated that Honda has V8/V10 capabilities, because it does have ability as shown by its racing program. I am not involved in Honda Corporate business decision. I am just venting that so far the decision it has made by not offering a V8 is hurting the brand. I really fail to see where my comments needs to be backed up by internal honda documentation. I never claimed that honda would make money by offering V8 only in the RL. But it is already shown in the market place by honda's two competitor out of its own country what a V8 brought to those brands. |
Originally Posted by chiawei
False information? I have already told you even though BMWNA websit blocks off the SMG as stand alone $0 cost option on the 545i 6 speed, it's not blocked off on the order guide. Provided a detail rebuttal to you on that.
I already showed you that you twisted the number around. I picked on easy one to show you that you miraculously shrunk the 1GRL trunk vol number to make a point. This was based on your 2nd set of number. Don't lie. Yes, if someone posts own number and slap himself back. Then my comment is correct. Such a liar. You stated it clearly that 1G RL has trunk vol of 14.cu ft and is small than 2G legend. Why lie? For someone that works for honda, it really shows the classiness of its employee's response. You lied, you twisted the number to make a point. Show me how does the initial set of 1GRL trunk number go shrunk to 14.0 CU. FT. All of the sudden your 2nd set of numbers shows 14.8 and you are claiming that you did not lie. The following TEXT ARE COPIED VERBATIM FROM YOUR POST in page 4 " Unlike you I let the FACTS speak for themselves. The 1G RL in some cases was smaller than the car it replaced. 1G RL Length: 195.1 in. Width: 71.3 in. Height: 54.5 in. Wheel Base: 114.6 in. Ground Clearance: 4.9 in. Curb Weight: 3693 lbs. Interior Front Head Room: 38.8 in. Front Hip Room: 55.7 in. Front Shoulder Room: 56.9 in. Rear Head Room: 36.8 in. Rear Shoulder Room: 56.9 in. Rear Hip Room: 56.5 in. Front Leg Room: 42.1 in. Rear Leg Room: 35.4 in. Luggage Capacity: 14 cu. ft. Maximum Seating: 5 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 2G Legend Length: 194.9 in. Width: 71.3 in. Height: 55.1 in. Wheel Base: 114.6 in. Curb Weight: 3516 lbs. Interior Front Head Room: 38.5 in. Rear Head Room: 36.5 in. Front Leg Room: 42.7 in. Rear Leg Room: 33.5 in. Luggage Capacity: 14.8 cu. ft. Maximum Seating: 5 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ The fact of the matter is the 1G RL was the Legend. Other than adding some rigidity to the platform nothing else was changed. If you want to call changing the sheet metal changes...so be it." Wrong. I am amazed at quality of honda employee and lack of understanding on its own product. 1GRL was the legend. I guss the 3.5L V6 is phatom. The change in bodry structure does not happen, heck i guess 1G RL never existed in your company. You still have not yet come back with the platform sharing on the Toyota V8. I would be more than happy to expose your lies. In 1999, the Acura 3.5RL benefited from more than 300 modifications yielding significant advances in handling precision and ride quality, styling, passenger comfort, refinement and value. The changes included an aggressively styled new exterior, and a more rigid chassis structure carried on retuned suspension and stopped by enlarged front disc brakes. On the safety front, Xenon High-Intensity Discharge (HID) headlamps became standard equipment, along with driver and front passenger side airbags featuring innovative occupant-detection technology in the front passenger's seat. The passenger-side front airbag also benefited from a new dual-stage inflator Torrance, Calif. 09/25/1999 -- OVERVIEW In 1999, the 3.5RL received a more aggressively styled exterior highlighted by a wider wheel stance and sharply chiseled body character lines. Restyled exterior panels including the front and rear bumpers, front chin spoiler, hood and grille, front fenders and headlamps, rear combination lamp, trunk lid and rear license plate garnish. Only the doors, rear quarter panel, outboard mirrors, roof and glass were carried over from the previous model. The 3.5RL body design is intended to impart a muscular stance and dynamic appearance while maintaining an enduring elegance and sophistication. The body of the 3.5RL is significantly taller than previous Acura luxury sedans, for improved headroom, especially in the rear seats, and a more substantial exterior appearance. The 3.5RL flanks are designed with high, relatively prominent "shoulder" lines, for a strong, masculine appearance, and the front grille/fender/bumper area is designed with a very clean, integrated configuration, giving a more massive, yet aerodynamically efficient look. Refinements in aerodynamics resulted in a low coefficient of drag of 0.32 and a coefficient of lift of 0.102, resulting in greater high-speed stability and a very quiet, distraction-free interior environment. And I agree...this soap opera has gone on long enough. you are welcome to email or pm me if you like. Heck, I have a toll free line...if you want to continue with this discussion. |
Originally Posted by Maximized
V8 or not aside, Acura needs a RWD vehicle first.
Hehe, but I agree it would be nice to see a RWD sedan in the future from Acura.:nod: |
Originally Posted by DownUnder
Acura does have one RWD vehicle.:D
Hehe, but I agree it would be nice to see a RWD sedan in the future from Acura.:nod: |
Originally Posted by chiawei
I am not claiming that honda would set back 10+ year like he claimed by developing V8 nor the cost of developing V8 would be lessened by sharing of platform.
Is English your second language? |
Originally Posted by Maximized
The problem with Acura is defining what the vehicles compete against. The RL is Acura's flagship vehicle and SHOULD be competing with say the A8, S class, 7 series, and Jaguar XJ8. Lexus and recently Infiniti have marketed their vehicles upward. Acura needs to quit setting it's target so low and start aiming at the big dogs. There is no way in hell anyone would compare the Acura RL against any of the mentioned cars, it's simply outclassed. Acura really has to do some hard thinking on how it places its models up against its competitor. V8 or not aside, Acura needs a RWD vehicle first.
I actually brought this up a couple years ago during a factory visit by a Honda executive. At least my take away from talking to him, honda really believes that they can really get away with a V6 and compete well with FWD sedans. To some extent he is correct. Because Acura as a division are doing good in terms of sales and financial helped by sucess of TL. But does it really defines Acura to be a luxury brand?? Moreover with so many of their sales is under the $35k range. The pressure from likes of camry/Accord/Avalon.... would only get higher. How much can acura really shield itself from being pushed upward? I know Avalon is nowhere as atheletic as TL, but 3.5L 280HP and 260 lf-ft certainly looks good. It probably will cost less than TL and have more feature as well. How much longer will acura benefit from the acura perceived premium image? Nobody knows. The trend is getting obvious. Koean car are now squeezing low to mid level Japanese car. The mid level japanese car is now squeezing the entry level luxury brand. Traditional luxury brand are now expanding their lineup to fight back with more powerful product with more choices. Nothing against honda itself other than decision it makes. But you have to wonder what are they going to do? No RWD yet, no V8 yet. None of them are beyond honda's capabilities. In fact it should be an ease. |
no comment... wrong forum.
|
Originally Posted by justinjsw
This is your problem...you don't read before you write. I said because they chose not to go the V8 route back in the late 80s...they(HONDA) set themselves (including Acura) back 10 years. Instead 10+ yrs later everybody is still having this V8 arguement.
Is English your second language? Like i said, stop all this name calling BS. Answer my question, hot shot. 1. You claimed that there is an NSX/S2000 replacement coming.- PLEASE SHOW IT. 2. Honda did not chose to go to a V8 in late 80's. But it could have done so now. The fact is that even now they are still not really looking into that. If honda is set back 10 years, we are in year 16 already still no V8 in sight. (please don;t mention the mugen legend LM) 3. You claimed that Toyota has tons of platform when V8 was launched- please show the fact. Let's be professional here. You have dodged my fact long enough. I think you would at least show some professionalism in answering your post. I won't go into the other issues such as BMW HP rating on the 2.8, toyota chassis usage... since you will not admit mistakes as such. My point has been exact since start of this thread. BMW/Toyota/Nissan gambled and won. Honda stay put and handed to torch to toyota. No it did not put honda 10 years behind, its close to 20 years now since we are in year 16 going to 17. I am done arguing on this. Show me your professionalism and answer my questions above. |
Originally Posted by chiawei
I am done arguing on this. |
Originally Posted by Maximized
The problem with Acura is defining what the vehicles compete against. The RL is Acura's flagship vehicle and SHOULD be competing with say the A8, S class, 7 series, and Jaguar XJ8....
...There is no way in hell anyone would compare the Acura RL against any of the mentioned cars, it's simply outclassed. |
Originally Posted by JeffS
Why should the RL be competing with the A8, S class, 7 series and XJ8???? Just because the RL is Acura's CURRENT flagship sedan doesn't mean it must compete against other manufacturer's flagships. It was not Acura's intention to go after those vehicles with the RL as it would be outclassed. As Acura has stated, the RL is competing against the A6, 5 series and E class. So comparing the RL to the A8, 7 and S would be like comparing a 325i against the RL. The BMW would be completely outclassed, because they are not meant to be compared with each other.
|
Originally Posted by JeffS
Why should the RL be competing with the A8, S class, 7 series and XJ8???? Just because the RL is Acura's CURRENT flagship sedan doesn't mean it must compete against other manufacturer's flagships. It was not Acura's intention to go after those vehicles with the RL as it would be outclassed. As Acura has stated, the RL is competing against the A6, 5 series and E class. So comparing the RL to the A8, 7 and S would be like comparing a 325i against the RL. The BMW would be completely outclassed, because they are not meant to be compared with each other.
|
All this thread has boiled down to is proving that everyone has ass holes... DOH! I mean opinions :toocool:
|
Originally Posted by JeffS
Why should the RL be competing with the A8, S class, 7 series and XJ8???? Just because the RL is Acura's CURRENT flagship sedan doesn't mean it must compete against other manufacturer's flagships. It was not Acura's intention to go after those vehicles with the RL as it would be outclassed. As Acura has stated, the RL is competing against the A6, 5 series and E class. So comparing the RL to the A8, 7 and S would be like comparing a 325i against the RL. The BMW would be completely outclassed, because they are not meant to be compared with each other.
|
Originally Posted by titan
Well said. Simply put, the RL is Honda's best sedan, and therefore it's flagship by befault. It's a midsized lux sedan competing with other midsized lux sedans. Other maker's flagships offer large, V8 powered, RWD sedans. That's what Acura's missing. Period. Even a large AWD sedan with V8 power, a la' Audi A8 would be welcomed IMO.
|
Originally Posted by titan
Well said. Simply put, the RL is Honda's best sedan, and therefore it's flagship by befault. It's a midsized lux sedan competing with other midsized lux sedans. Other maker's flagships offer large, V8 powered, RWD sedans. That's what Acura's missing. Period. Even a large AWD sedan with V8 power, a la' Audi A8 would be welcomed IMO.
|
Originally Posted by Maximized
If Acura wants to be a true luxury car division, they need to drop the TSX
:rofl: :rolleyes: |
Originally Posted by Maximized
This is a big problem though. Acura hasn't effectively defined their competition and where their products are placed in the market? Let's say that the RL does in fact compete with midsize models, such as the A6 or 5 series. That would leave the TL competing against the 3 series, G35, and A4. Now where does the TSX fit into the equation and/or the RSX? If Acura wants to be a true luxury car division, they need to drop the TSX and RSX. Honda already has models that are similar or could brand these 2 cars as Hondas. Next, they need to then create a "real" flagship. To compete with the A8, 7 series, S class, etc. the car NEEDS a V8. Acura has a good AWD system, so that would be the logical drive layout.
|
Originally Posted by Maximized
This is a big problem though. Acura hasn't effectively defined their competition and where their products are placed in the market? Let's say that the RL does in fact compete with midsize models, such as the A6 or 5 series. That would leave the TL competing against the 3 series, G35, and A4. Now where does the TSX fit into the equation and/or the RSX? If Acura wants to be a true luxury car division, they need to drop the TSX and RSX. Honda already has models that are similar or could brand these 2 cars as Hondas. Next, they need to then create a "real" flagship. To compete with the A8, 7 series, S class, etc. the car NEEDS a V8. Acura has a good AWD system, so that would be the logical drive layout.
I don't think the price of the car reflects what makes a luxury brand. The current Luxury marquees are adding a value selection in 2005/2006. |
Originally Posted by domn
:rofl:
:rolleyes: |
Where is it written that manufactueres have to develope cars to target another specific car from another maker :shrug:
TSX = 4 cylinder A4, 325, S40, 9-3, C Class TL = 6 Cylinder A4, 330, S60, 9-5, C Class 6 Cylinder, etc Acura has two cars that can POTENTIALLY meet the needs of customers shopping other brands. I'm not saying they always will but the possibility exists. And sales numbers more than prove you wrong. Call Acura what you will, they're selling. |
Originally Posted by EZZ
I guess the BMW 1-series will relegate BMW to a non-luxury car maker or perhaps Lexus lost its status as a luxury car brand when the cheapo IS was introduced. Poor Audi with its new A3 series.
I don't think the price of the car reflects what makes a luxury brand. The current Luxury marquees are adding a value selection in 2005/2006. Maybe I shouldn't have used such a harsh word, but it's generally accepted in the auto industry that the luxury segment, is generally defined to include cars and trucks with prices that start just over $30,000. Also, take into account that vehicles like the 1-series have historically had a hard time selling in the US....Remember the 318Ti? |
Originally Posted by domn
Where is it written that manufactueres have to develope cars to target another specific car from another maker :shrug:
TSX = 4 cylinder A4, 325, S40, 9-3, C Class TL = 6 Cylinder A4, 330, S60, 9-5, C Class 6 Cylinder, etc Acura has two cars that can POTENTIALLY meet the needs of customers shopping other brands. I'm not saying they always will but the possibility exists. And sales numbers more than prove you wrong. Call Acura what you will, they're selling. BTW....If Acura is satisfied with it's lineup great, but being #5 in Luxury car sales isn't a high accolade. |
Originally Posted by Maximized
No where is it written to develop cars to specific makes, but rather it should be done to specific target markets. You have to build a vehicle to the wants and need of the consumer. Right now, it seems like luxury car consumers demand a rwd platform, powerful engine, and a dynamic chassis. Acura can develop their FWD chassis's as much as they want, but in the end it's still inferior to AWD and RWD. Infiniti was in the same situation a few years back and recently changed. 3 years back the I35 was their entry level car. It was a solid vehicle, but when you compared it to the competition it was lacking. The G35 was introduced as Infiniti's entry level sedan and started the reformation.
BTW....If Acura is satisfied with it's lineup great, but being #5 in Luxury car sales isn't a high accolade. :rolleyes: |
Originally Posted by domn
They demand RWD do they. Tell that to the 10,000 + TL, TSX buyers last month and the 100,000+ annually. Sounds like there are plenty of consumers who are having their needs filled.
:rolleyes: Plenty of consumers bought FWD Cadillacs, now these same consumers are also shopping the new RWD Caddi's instead of their German competitors. My father is a perfect example of this. |
Originally Posted by Maximized
BTW....If Acura is satisfied with it's lineup great, but being #5 in Luxury car sales isn't a high accolade. I'm not sure who your counting ahead of Acura but.... U.S Sales Lexus 2004 Sales = 287,927 Acura 2004 Sales = 170,918 Infiniti 2004 Sales = 130,987 I'm not going to bother digging up BMW, Audi and Merc sales but we know they all trail Lexus in US sales so lets presume they are all ahead of Acura and Infiniti. So you claim Luxury buyers demand RWD, yet Acura outsells mostly RWD Infiniti and Lexus's top selling model the ES330 is FWD? Are you sure they demand RWD? |
Originally Posted by Maximized
Maybe you should check out the figures on BMW's 3 series, for fun check out the global sales. Then take a look at G35 sales. Then the 300C. You want me to go on further? The market is going back to RWD, if you don't see this well then I am sorry. With the advant of stability control, traction control, and the advancement of A/S tires FWD doesn't have much of a traction advantage in bad weather.
Plenty of consumers bought FWD Cadillacs, now these same consumers are also shopping the new RWD Caddi's instead of their German competitors. My father is a perfect example of this. I have not once said FWD cars are superior to RWD for driving dynamics, I know better. I'm also not going to argue that the market is going RWD, thats fairly obvious. But I take exception with blankets statements like " The market demands RWD" when Acura sales are better than Infiniti's and Lexus (The Luxury Brand" ) has a FWD car as their best seller. If there was no need for Acura to sell a FWD car than this site wouldn't be here and we wouldn't be having this discussion. THERE IS A NEED for FWD, the numbers prove it and numbers as we know don't lie. |
Originally Posted by domn
I'm not sure who your counting ahead of Acura but....
U.S Sales Lexus 2004 Sales = 287,927 Acura 2004 Sales = 170,918 Infiniti 2004 Sales = 130,987 I'm not going to bother digging up BMW, Audi and Merc sales but we know they all trail Lexus in US sales so lets presume they are all ahead of Acura and Infiniti. So you claim Luxury buyers demand RWD, yet Acura outsells mostly RWD Infiniti and Lexus's top selling model the ES330 is FWD? Are you sure they demand RWD? |
Originally Posted by EZZ
These are all terrible comparisons because the price of the vehicles differ dramatically. First, Acura has 2 cars that are cheaper than the cheapest Infiniti model. 2nd, I would hardly call TSX and RSX buyers, "Luxury" buyers as these models are cheaper than a fully loaded Camry. Perhaps if you lumped together TL, RL, and other true Luxury models and compared how FWD cars do relative to RWD cars in terms of sales, I would believe that Luxury buyers actually do not care if they are RWD vs FWD. As it stands, no market trends can be determined by looking at these figures...we simply need more data to ascertain the buying preferences of "luxury" buyers.
TL sales are 7K + per month. G35 sales are 4K + per month. ES30 Sales are more than both. It can not be argued that the ES330 is not a Luxury car. Yet its FWD and sells very, very well. Thats the point. |
Originally Posted by domn
I have not once said FWD cars are superior to RWD for driving dynamics, I know better. I'm also not going to argue that the market is going RWD, thats fairly obvious. But I take exception with blankets statements like " The market demands RWD" when Acura sales are better than Infiniti's and Lexus (The Luxury Brand" ) has a FWD car as their best seller.
If there was no need for Acura to sell a FWD car than this site wouldn't be here and we wouldn't be having this discussion. THERE IS A NEED for FWD, the numbers prove it and numbers as we know don't lie. As for your first post above: Lexus, BMW, Cadillac, and MB are above Acura in quite a bit. The ES330 sells well because frankly it's an entry level vehicle. More people are able to afford a $33,000 ES330 vs a $65,000 LS430. The ES isn't marketed as a sporty performance vehicle, therefore RWD isn't a necessary. Acura on the other hand markets the TL, RL, and TSX as performance models. Acura would be wise to even offer a AWD model of the vehicles listed above. |
Originally Posted by domn
TSX sales OWN IS300 sales.
TL sales are 7K + per month. G35 sales are 4K + per month. ES30 Sales are more than both. It can not be argued that the ES330 is not a Luxury car. Yet its FWD and sells very, very well. Thats the point. |
Originally Posted by domn
TSX sales OWN IS300 sales.
TL sales are 7K + per month. G35 sales are 4K + per month. ES30 Sales are more than both. It can not be argued that the ES330 is not a Luxury car. Yet its FWD and sells very, very well. Thats the point. |
Originally Posted by EZZ
TL + ES330 + TSX < G35 + BMW 325 + Merc C class + CTS. FWD vs. RWD...what sells better? Better yet, how about FWD applications in $40k cars vs RWD applications...no comparison there.
On a per model basis, FWD ES330s outsell everything else. There is a place for FWD in this market. Considering that the majority of consumers cannot tell the difference between FWD and RWD cars, this distinction is only relevant to an enthusiast crowd. When analyzing the general car buying public, FWD and RWD is irrelevant. What matters most to the consumer is value, reliability, and brand appeal. |
Originally Posted by CGTSX2004
As for the flagship, don't worry, it's supposedly in the works.
Originally Posted by CGTSX2004
Your math isn't logical. If three models are on one side, 3 models should be on the other side. And since there are more RWD models at this point, this kind of a comparison isn't logical.
On a per model basis, FWD ES330s outsell everything else. There is a place for FWD in this market. Considering that the majority of consumers cannot tell the difference between FWD and RWD cars, this distinction is only relevant to an enthusiast crowd. When analyzing the general car buying public, FWD and RWD is irrelevant. What matters most to the consumer is value, reliability, and brand appeal. I'm willing to bet that majority of people who buy ES300 don't care whether it's FWD or RWD. |
Originally Posted by sipark
Am I really that behind in automotive news? Is there going to be a sedan above RL? Got link?
:agree: I'm willing to bet that majority of people who buy ES300 don't care whether it's FWD or RWD. |
Originally Posted by CGTSX2004
:squint: Your math isn't logical. If three models are on one side, 3 models should be on the other side. And since there are more RWD models at this point, this kind of a comparison isn't logical.
On a per model basis, FWD ES330s outsell everything else. There is a place for FWD in this market. Considering that the majority of consumers cannot tell the difference between FWD and RWD cars, this distinction is only relevant to an enthusiast crowd. When analyzing the general car buying public, FWD and RWD is irrelevant. What matters most to the consumer is value, reliability, and brand appeal. |
Originally Posted by CGTSX2004
:squint: Your math isn't logical. If three models are on one side, 3 models should be on the other side. And since there are more RWD models at this point, this kind of a comparison isn't logical.
On a per model basis, FWD ES330s outsell everything else. There is a place for FWD in this market. Considering that the majority of consumers cannot tell the difference between FWD and RWD cars, this distinction is only relevant to an enthusiast crowd. When analyzing the general car buying public, FWD and RWD is irrelevant. What matters most to the consumer is value, reliability, and brand appeal. |
Originally Posted by Maximized
The first time it rains or snows, everyone should be able to tell the difference between FWD and RWD.
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:25 PM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands