F23A4

Dom and mrdeeno make a good point regarding the AV6 6MT's wheels.

Infamous425

i use to have those type-S wheels on my 02 accord coupe and there were plenty of people who thought my car was an acura CL

mrdeeno

And that just goes to show how similar Honda/Acura designed cars are (see post#36). This is car DESIGN, not making a car FWD or RWD or equipping it with a V10 engine. There is a LOT of possible changes they can make to differentiate these cars.

The current TL is a good example and looks NOTHING like an Accord. But then they go and make a conservative RL that although not identical to an accord, is just a different presentation of the same Vanilla.

They work so hard trying to differentiate the Acura BRAND from the honda BRAND from a marketing POV...but then they don't follow through to their designs, probably one of the most important aspects to differentiate the brands.

vishnus11

whoopti-fuckin-do.... I'm gonna cry myself to sleep just knowing that "CanadianDude" won't buy another Acura

Cya

vishnus11

Your focusing your argument on one freakin car - the RL. Hey, we all know it hasn't performed as well as hoped in the marketplace and like I said, I'm sure there's a fix somewhere down the pipeline.

Yet, your quick to overlook the fact that despite this so called "Stigma" that surrounds the Acura image, the TL and TSX sedans (the big sellers) and both big sellers and outstanding sedans. The TL in particualr is the best selling luxo sedan in the country. Period.

While noticing that the rims are shared between a car that is no longer sold anymore, and an Accord are the same is an acute observation, this has nothing to do with "design" effort - they're good looking rims plain and simple (as youngTL said, he loves them on his Accord), and I see no "diluting" of the Acura brand by using these rims.

Whining over this platform sharing thing is bullshit. All companies do it, especially in today's world. The Saab 9-3 and the Pontiac G6 share the Epsilon platform. And? THey both a WORLD's apart to drive and have to very distinct characters (driven both). THe same goes for a TL and an Accord. And although the RL may "look" like an Accord to some, the quality that resonates through the vehicle is definitely a clear cut higher than any Accord I've seen. Good for Nissan/Infiniti that it whores out two distinct platforms instead of one. Honda/Acura on the other hand have a platform that's flexible enough in that it allows both FWD and AWD cars of all shapes and sizes to be built on.

Last but not least, I definetely don't think IMO that Acura's image is getting "stagnant". If anything (and judging by the non car enthusiasts I talk to about Acura when asked about my car), the success and influx of new products from Acura, and more marketing has put Acura back on the map, and is pulling newer customers.

vishnus11

The supposed "typo" was a cornerstone of their argument. Some credible source

mrdeeno

So I guess Honda must have a better image that Acura and even Lexus since it outsells them also. Good point! I guess that Ferrari and Bentley must have terrible images since they sell SOO FEW cars.

We're talking about image here, not sales numbers. High sales numbers of entry level luxury cars do not translate into higher image.

Uh, of course it has "nothing" to do with the design effort...there WAS NO DESIGN EFFORT...they just used "old" inventory. And please tell me how using the EXACT same rim design between Acura and Honda helps to differentiate the two brand? That's what this discussion is about and has NOTHING to do with the merits of the rim itself. You missed the point.

Who's whining over platform sharing? I think it's great. I think auto companies can do many many things with platforms, that's why I gave the infiniti example. But Acura does NOT do this with platform sharing...their car designs are similar because they CHOOSE the designs to be similar. That's the argument and shows that you totally missed the point again.


They maybe pulling in new customers and setting sales records every month, but that doesn't do anything for the brand image... Acura is known as the "sensible" premium brand. they continue to be known as the "sensible" premium brand. That has not changed since the Integra. That has not changed since the last gen TL. That has not changed since the current gen. TL. That has not changed since the current RL was introduced. They have continued to fail to move upmarket. They are chasing volume rather than image. their image is stagnant.

If Acura wasn't stagnant and their image was great, then this thread, along with many others that have popped up criticizing Acura, wouldn't even exist. Instead we'd have "Acura is doing great!" and "Acura continues to make the right moves" threads...we don't.

F23A4

So, having an FFL platform for the [u]downmarket[/i] Nissan brand and an FM platform for the [u]upmarket[/i] Infiniti now constitutes whoring?

Nevermind the fact that the FFL platform is flexible enough to cover 2 sedans (Altima, Maxima), 1 SUV (Murano) and 1 minivan (Quest) or the fact that the FM platform covers 2 sedans (G, M w/2 powertrains), one of the hottest coupes on the market (G), one SUV (FX w/2 powertrains) and 1 sports car (Z).

mrdeeno

But of course, Acura is infallible...the cars that are built on the same platform, even if they "appear" less differentiated from model to model than the differentiation achieved by other automakers sharing platforms, are actually MORE differentiated.

And you may ask why? It's simple...as their motto goes..."Because it's a Honda"...wait...I mean "Acura".

Of all the "shapes and sizes" that vishnus11 claims that Acura can build...all of them are peculiarly very similar in shapes and sizes...

should we start to discuss the merits of Acura's theoretical V8 and compare it to the production V8's of other automakers next?

youngTL

It is strange and interesting, but I contend if they were just clearing out inventory (and now that those wheels are on the 6MT sedan in the USA too), wouldn't they run out of them before they run out of 6MT Accords? I think they're making new wheels of the same design. Although, I do think that it points to not spending money trying to design new wheels, which is sort of a cop-out. Furthermore, I'd be happier if they took that money they saved and spent it on some new platform for Acura. A completely unique one, not the one used in the Accord (as good as it is, it just can't match the RL's needs).

F23A4

youngTL

Honda does have a better image than Acura. It's more well-known (by a LOT). Everyone knows what a Honda is and what it's qualities are supposed to be (won't break down, fun to drive, high-revving, value for the dollar, ages well, fuel efficient, good manual transmissions, etc), whereas some people don't even know what an Acura is, or an Infiniti for that matter. Honda has a very good image and it is well deserved.

Acura's problem is they need to design something that still embodies SOME of the qualities of a Honda, but not all of them. Excitement, looks, and luxuriousness need to be placed higher on their priority list before their image will improve.

mrdeeno

No doubt Honda is more well known, but again that's because of its sheer sales volume. I'm sure there are more non-enthusiasts that more readily recognize the Acura or Honda nameplate than even Aston or Maybach, but then again it's not all about quantity.

And Acura's do have a lot of Honda traits that are advantageous such as refinement, reliability, value...but as you stated, they do need to embody more bold designs, luxuriousness, and performance...things they CAN do even with platform sharing with Honda models.

But the fact remains that they haven't done this to its full potential. We can discuss what Acura CAN and CAN'T do until the cows come home...it's what they actually DO that counts.

youngTL

What needs to be done is Acura needs to be let off the leash that Honda holds it on. That way, it wouldn't matter that the Accord and TSX are almost the same price, since the TSX should be MUCH different. It's already fairly different in driving characteristics and even looks, but it needs more of a differentiation. Of course they haven't done this to the full potential. Their management was stagnating. All I can say is I hope the new people let the engineers do their thing, and then we can actually see what they actually produce instead of speculating.

And yeah, Honda is more well-known because of volume, but also word of mouth (related to volume cause more people own Hondas than any luxury brand). People just don't think of Acura as vaunted as Honda. When I had an Acura, people hardly said anything, but now that I have a Honda, I'm getting lots of reinforcement for my good purchase. Had I bought a Camry, my friends would have made fun of me because Toyota has a boring image.

vishnus11

Oh shit, in my haste I've offended the resident nissan guy My mistake there

vishnus11

My point was to illustrate that in the entry level luxo segment, the TL is at the top of the heap, so whatever the article was trying to illustrate about "dwindling" Acura sales is moot point. It also illustrates that Acura must be doing something right.

If sales isn't the point, then why do you keepin harpin on about poor RL sales. Why don't we all just say its a great well built, well designed sedan and call it a day. Sales is the the bottom line. You Ferrari/Bentley example is complete bullshit - stick to the point. Those cars are intended to be sold in low volumes, and achieve or usually exceed their targets. The RL didn't. The TL on the other hand did. Tell me one brand with so called "image" that DOESN'T sell well? There is no such thing. Higher sales for a company such as Acura, within a segment of the market = one of the components to moving their image even more upmarket.

Talk about missing the point - why don't you stick with yours. You originally said that Acura could "CHOOSE" to make the RL different but they didn't. I agree. But what about the rest of the freakin lineup. Where are the other poor design "choices"? Like I said, YOUR ARGUMENT IS BASED UPON ONE CAR.

As far as the rim issue goes, you say no design effort, others say, if it's a good looking rim THAT IS NO LONGER USED BY ACURA, why not now use it 3 years later on a Honda product. VTEC filtered down from the NSX to the civic, does that make it bad?

Your argument really makes no sense. You say Acura and Honda don't differentiate themselves enough, yet focus your argument on one car and a set of rims?

vishnus11

I agree with a lot of your points. Until recently (and even to some extent now) Acura has done a poor job of marketing itslef in the right manner. They had the advantage of being the first to the game, but the marketing guys somehow screwed up so that until recently, many people didn't see Honda and Acura as distinct as they saw Toyota and Lexus.

F23A4

(too bad I could not place the '[u]' and '[i]' in the right order in my post. )

mrdeeno

vishnus is right. im' giong to start some new threads right now...


i'm going to start a thread..."Acura is making ALL the right moves...look at RL Sales!".

Then i'm going to start another thread...Honda ROCKS because the Accord 6sp MT is going to use same rim design as the prev. generations TL/CL-S...because we all know that the company WANTED to spend money and research to pick out a new style of rim for the NEW accord...but the engineers wanted to reuse a great and trusty rim. It was an Engineering and Design decision, not a cost saving move!

Then I'm giong to start another thread..."The TSX, TL, and NEW RDX sales will vault Acura to new heights...Bentley, watchout!"

Don't hold your breath though...

mrdeeno

No, YOU missed every point of all these arguments.

And i won't bother to argue with you anymore, because that'll just go over your head too!

dom

deeno, you didn't respond to any of vishnus11's points in his previous post. They are all valid points especially the one about the RL being the only car in Acura's lineup that can be considered a flop.

Fact is the TL and TSX have already vaulted Acura sales to record heights (for them at least).

mrdeeno

His points are valid, but they are not on point of the argument..."Acura's image is stagnant". My response then to show how vishnus missed the point...

the Ferrari/Bently example is FAR from bullshit...

I bring up Ferrari and Bently because you seem to be so concerned with "sales numbers"...and Ferrari and Bentley are examples that sales numbers don't define the brand...the quality and desirability of the cars do. The fact that TL and TSX are the desirable Acura cars, while the RL is not as desirable, means that the TL and TSX are defining the brand. Please tell me how a popular TL or TSX moves the image upmarket? A popular RL would, but the RL is not as "desirable" as they had hoped.

When I looked at the TL/CL-S in 2000, Acura's image is sensible premium cars with a lot of value. 2006...Acura's image is sensible premium cars with a lot of value. Stagnant.


Ok, how can I put this more clearly...using my Infiniti example AGAIN

Nissan's FM platform

midsize sedans/coupes - G/M
Sports cars - 350Z
SUVs - FX
Drives - RWD/AWD

3 significantly differnet styles, 2 different drive configurations.


Now Honda's platform.

Sedans/coupes - Accord, TL, TSX
Sports cars -
SUVs -
Drives - FWD/AWD

1 style (sedans and coupes), no sports cars, no suvs. 2 different drive configurations.

I hope this CLEARLY shows how it is possible to have many VERY different designs on one platform...yet Honda/Acura CHOOSES to make their cars very similar.

Again, you missed the point. The point is not whether it's a good rim or a bad rim or whatever.

the point is that this is an exmaple of them not putting in much effort to differentiate Acura from Honda. The rim can be the GREATEST RIM IN THE WORLD for all I care...the point still remains that they did not put the effort in to differentiate, which is why they used the same rim.

Your vtec example doesn't apply, because that's a technology that contributes directly to the benefit of the car. If the CL-S rims are the greatest rims in the world and there is no alternative, then it would make sense to use the same rims. But they are not...Honda did it to save money, pure and simple, and that decision goes against separating the 2 brands.


Uh, I just brought up MANY examples with many cars, and not just current ones...first generation CL was very similar to an accord. 2nd gen. CL was very similar to an Accord. 2nd gen TL was very similar to an Accord. The previous RL was actually VERY different from an Accord...yet the current one is more similar!
the TSX IS basically an Accord with a nicer interior and different badging.

the rim argument is just another small example that supports the point...the point that you keep on missing.

Acura's image has ALWAYS been like this...sensible cars that are a half step above honda's cars.

Stagnant.

vtecracer

As much of a Honda-humper I am, I agree with pretty much everything Mr.Deeno says regarding Acura's image. I hate to admit it, but it is true.

I NEVER EVER thought that I would be driving anything but a Honda or Acura. 6 months ago I left the bandwagon. Hopefully just temporary. Acura just wasn't cutting it for me. I'm hoping around the turn of the decade that Acura shapes up their act. What REALLY needs to happen for Acura to wake up is a huge drop in sales like whats been happening to Infiniti these past few months. Maybe the RL sales have been enough to wake them up. I don't know. Because with every month being a record month, the corporate homos are just going to be under the impression that everything they are doing is right. I guess we are all just going to have to wait a few years and see what happens. In the mean time, I won't say what I'm driving now

canadiandude

Bullshit. Acura dealerships are stand alone. What evidence do you have that Honda and Acura are indistinct? Hmmm, DIFFERNT NAME, DIFFERENT BADGING, DIFFERENT MODELS. It's not about marketing, it's about product. Lexus is better at product and service. Simple. No deep analysis needed. I own both Acura and Lexus and I can tell you that Lexus is far superior in every respect. True, it is more expensive---but I think that is the true reason why Lexus is held in higher regard--charge more for something and the perception of the product improves.

Acuras sell well because they are a BARGAIN--the TL is a good seller because you are getting the size and drive of a 5-series BMW for a 3-series price---if the TL was priced 10.000 dollars more, it would not sell half as many units. The RL is a good example of this---why pay 69,000 (Cdn) for an RL when you can have a BMW 530xi or an A6?

mrdeeno

^^ I think one of my posts somewhere compares Acura to GM...another company that likes to "play" with marketing rather than product.

Also, I bought a new Honda and later replaced it with the Acura. I was honestly more impressed with the Honda dealership....they shared floorspace with Hyundai. The Acura dealership shared floorspace with Suzuki...and not the motorcycles. And they were both owned by the same parent dealership.

knight rider

iTrader: (1)

This thread honestly makes me want to go to the Lexus dealership right now, but as I stated in a thread months ago there are no coupes to buy. Well there are, but I do not want to joint the ranks of the gazillion G35C/350Z owners. Or buy the overpriced 330 Coupe or C70. And I don't want a samll but high-powered boytoy marketed to 21 year olds.

With so many instances of Acura's shortcomings over the years I think I will become a Lexus customer if the IS loses 2 doors.

knight rider

iTrader: (1)

Oh, one other thing. Acura could probably take a page out of Chryslers book on how to turn a bland brand to an exciting one.

vishnus11

Does intelligence allude you?

This discussion is not a Lexus vs. Acura thread. I mentioned that the public at large don't see Honda and Acura as two very distinct brands, at least not as distinct as Toyota and Lexus. Until recently, people didn't really see Acura as a step up from Honda, but knew that it had "something to do with Acura". However, when it comes to Lexus, people definetely see this as a big step up from a Toyota, whilst keeping Toyota's core values (reliabilty etc.)

You seem quick to bash on Acura - no one could care two shits about whether you own an Acura and a Lexus. It would make sense if you mentioned what year each car was and what model it was, but then I guess that would stress you brain too much. Yeah, a 2006 Lexus LS430 is a better made vehicle than a 1994 Acura Integra? What's your point? You believe Lexus is a better made vehicle. In some respects I agree, but at the same time, your charged that extra premium for that. Not that its a bad thing, but its different strokes for different folks. Some value an wonderful dealership service experience where a playboy playmate waits on you while your car's having a oil change, whereas others (like myself) drop of the car for service, and pick it up when it's done, and expect the work to be done in a timely and professional manner - I could care two shits about whether my dealership serves Starbucks coffee or not.

^Extreme example, but as I said, different strokes for different folks. You want a higher quality TL - buy an RL. Thats why its priced like it is.

vishnus11

In all honesty, I'm not quite following your logic here: you said in 2000 you saw Acura as a "sensible premium cars with value" and you see the same thing in 2006. The same could be said of many other manufacturers, BMW and Infiniti excluded, most everyone other brand could be looked at in the same way. For example, in 2000 I saw Lexus as brand that built dead-reliable, smooth, quite, refined, dull cars, and....hey presto, in 2006, its the same story. But that hasn't hurt Lexus's image, so I don't see why Acura should be taking radical action? In certain cases (such as in the case of BMW) their new "image" after the radical Bangle designed has shunned away potential buyers and detracted from their image. Maybe you could explain this further?

As far as the flexibility of Honda's platform, you left out the fact that (and someone correct me if I'm wrong on this one) the Global Midsize platform also spawns the Oddy, Pilot, MDX, and Ridgeline. The Oddy platform (Global Light Truck) itself is just an extended version of the Global Midsize platform.

Your example of a TSX being an Accord with a differnt interior and badging. Its a EURO accord, and in Europe, Accords are decidely more upmarket because Honda doesn't need to fear of it competing with Acura since Acura of course, doesn't exist there. Bringing it over here, AND installing a completely new interior has only made it a better sedan and if you've even driven and sat in either vehicle (Accord and TSX) you'd realize that they have different characters.

I do agree with you on the 1st gen CL being an Accord coupe with a frock. You make some valid points and comparisons. However in TODAY's lineup, I don't think that the dynamics and character of any of Acura's vehicles clashes with that of Hondas. Sure the RL might LOOK like an Accord (to some, not to me, but thats jsut my ) it sure as hell has no fear of people cross shopping it and an accord.

If anything, the RSX and the Civic SI were two vehicle that were similar in character and mission, and .......... Acura promptly got rid of the RSX. As I said previously, I'm sure it will be back in some form or the other as a TSX coupe.

Last but not least, stick to one point. You intially said that you saw Acura as a "sensible PREMIUM brand with value" yet you then go back and say that you see Acura as a "sensible brand that's half a step above Honda" Those a two very different things.

EDIT: kinda a sidenote here in general, to illustrate the platform sharing isn't ALWAYS the way to go. Nissan uses the FM platform to build the 350Z and because that platform also spawns SUVs and larger sedan's the platform is overengineered for the 350Z and thus makes it porky. Don't get me wrong, it's a great car, but its hefty.

canadiandude

I notice that you like to hurl insults when you reply to a criticism to your thread. Grow up or take your ball home and play with someone else.

Again, you make statements but have no facts to back them up. The cars I own and refer to are a 2005 TL and a 2007 RX 350--I feel I am qualified to give my opinion on two cars that I actually drive.

What I actually value is a company that stands behind the products it sells. My leather seats in the TL cracked after 5000km--cheap, poor quality southern-hemisphere leather. Acura would not replace them (you can check the boards for this common complaint and Acura's lack of interest in dealing with it). By contrast, the RX is of much better quality and they actually pick up the car from my work to do an oil change and return it to me a few hours later. So go ahead, and keep dropping your car off. BTW, Starbucks Coffee? WTF

For all you IS fans, there will be a coupe and a convertible in about 1.5 years--so I hear.

mrdeeno

First off, being a maker of "sensible premium cars with value" is a very good thing...unfortunately, they already do that with Honda. The entire Honda lineup is made up of "premium" sensible cars, except for maybe the Fit.

The reason it is OBVIOUS they want to move the Acura lineup upmarket is because they didn't just kill off the RL. If they intended to stay where they are, they would have just killed the RL and focused their R&D and sales in the TL, TSX, and their SUVs. But they are failing to move upmarket because of the slow acceptance of the RL. The difference between being "stagnant" and "maintaining" an image is the intention...maybe MB or Lex or whoever has an image they are satisfied with, and any improvement is incremential at best, but most of it is maintenance. Acura is not at this point...they WANT to move upmarket but are having a hard time. That's why they are "stagnant".

Another example...they had to kill the RSX, why? Because the Civic moved upmarket and the top line is in RSX territory. What next? The next Accord is moved upmarket again and eclipses the TL, like the current model did to the last gen. TL? If they plan on selling a discounted version of the RL, what will that sell at if the non-discounted version is selling at $42k? The TL can't move up otherwise it'll step on the RL...what next, kill the TL?


I've seen arguments both ways about this. Correct, the truck platform is a heavily modified midsize platform...but the gist is whether you think they are the same platform or a different platform. Honda considers them different enough to be a separate platform. Take it how you want, but IMO they have done MORE differentiation with their truck platform than their midsize platform.


That does not negate the fact that it IS STILL an Accord.

It's not a matter of cross shopping the cars (although I'm sure it happens more than you think with the Accord and TL and TSX) again, this discussion is about image. Image has as much to do with people who can't afford to buy the cars as much as people who can. The fact is both Acuras and Hondas share similar conservative styling...this is NOT necessary and this is a design decision. They want people to think of Acura separately from Honda, yet they give them the same conservative styling? Again, this is not conducive to raising its image.


I had forgotten what I posted earlier and didn't go back and read, so my bad. but even saying "half a step above Honda" can still mean "value", although I admit that wasn't my intention.

What I WANT Acura to be, a "PREMIUM brand", not a sensible brand with value. Value in large quantities is good for Honda, but not for Acura. and I think it is OBVIOUS they were intending to get away by observing the pricing for the RL. Had they created a truly compelling model that unquestionably met or trounced the competition in most factors (variety of models, variety of engines, variety of options, sportiness, luxury, technology, comfort, etc.), I feel they would have succeeded and be able to sell the RL for a higher MSRP than they do now...ie selling cars that are not dependent on value.

But instead, in their limited vision, they gave us the RL the way it is...a capable and fine automobile, but not compelling enough to buy at non-value pricing.

TMQ

Sorry to bring back the old discussion. I think a lot of us are pretty disappointed with Acura by now.

I'm just curious if any one actually owns Honda stocks?

HMC seems financially sound, less debt than equity, better profit margin and higher growth rate than the industry. Its P/E ratio is less than net income growth, and institutional holding is less than 10%.

I thought about buying some shares, but the state of the Acura brand keeps stopping me.

Crazy Bimmer

Why do people think like this? Just because they dont make cars for car enthusiast doesnt mean their cars dont sell.

Car enthusiast are maybe 2% of car buyers. They arent losing much by not gaining our sales.

Also last I checked, Acura is still doing well selling the TSX, MDX and the TL.

TMQ

Who mentioned anything about enthusiasts? purely from a financial perspective:

true with the entry level TSX.

I think for the brand new MDX, it's probably selling below expectation.

for TL, it's been down, and with all the competition and no replacement until the 2009 model, it'll be tough.

RDX - much below expectation.

RL - huge flop in terms of sales.

Future Acura - nobody has a clue. Product cadence is important, and to buy a company's stock, I'm most interested in the longer term.

Mokos23

Are you saying that the TSX is the only Acura car that's saving the brand and turning a profit?

I like the new MDX, wonder why it's not selling as well as the previous gen.

SRK85

Acura is fine the only problem is the TSX is over priced. I mean around 30,000 for a v4 car with navi. There better cars with navi systems and better engines for that price. But anyways Acura is fine they just need to release a new sedan. The 3g TL is one of the most popular cars I see them everywhere now.

TMQ

TSX - being an euro/japan accord - for an inline4 to sell at that price point and doing well, it's quite amazing. The whole package is well executed - Honda at its best. The more expensive Acuras - have catching up to do against the competition.

mrdeeno

I used to own Nissan stock, and this was prior to owning a Nissan (bought VERY low while they were still losing money and made out BIG once they turned around).

As for Honda, I would buy Honda stock for Honda automobiles, not Acura. They seem to have no idea what direction to take Acura with no clear indication either short or long term where to go ("Let's be performance oriented...and kill off all our coupes for SUVs and sedans and refuse to make a V8 or RWD!" or "Let's make the next NSX compete with hardcore exotics like Ferrari...no let's compete with Aston instead...no let's do something else!" ).

Honda on the other hand has held true to what they offer...reliable, sensible, fun, upmarket cars for each respective class that Honda competes in under the Honda label.

But Acura isn't a drain on Honda since they do sell.

Honda likes to play it safe most of the time...and its stock is "safe" most of the time. From a financial perspective, I would buy Honda stock for a relatively safe investment, but I would not buy any current honda or acura product (except maybe a lawnmower) since they don't offer me anything i want at the moment.

ostrich

I thought that the TSX was an absolute BARGAIN and totally UNDERPRICED!

V4???????????

Anyway, it is rather simplistic to rate a car just by the engine and the navi system. In any case, both are already mighty fine on the TSX, and it has so much more to offer too... I really appreciate the level of sophisticated refinement that the TSX has to offer.

SRK85

Really I could of sworn the 2007 models were 30,000 with all the features, and the 2006 with all the features were 28,000