Everybody has their own opinion on whether Acuras are worth the premium over Hondas or not. That's why you bought one, or why you didn't. No point debating the differences between them.

This thread is just another classic case of "if you don't have anything good to say, don't say it."

 

IMO the only people who would say "Acura is just an overpriced Honda" are just not driving enthusiasts. Plain and simple. They're the types that believe a car is just a piece of machinery that gets you from point A to point B.

 

^ Well, not really sure Acura's are geared towards "driving enthusiasts" these days...esp. with their current lineup.

 

I find Acuras are more geared to car enthusiasts than the average carmaker. Their cars offer competitive power, SH-AWD, and good manual transmissions (from what I hear). I wish they had a halo car, though.

 

• Stiffer suspension and quicker steering
• Torsen type LSD
• Brembo Front brakes
• Aluminum front sub-frame

These are 3G TL to 7G Accord, huge difference in ride/handling even though the TL was based the Accord platform.

As to the OP, who cares what others think of what you drive?

 

Very true, but my point was moreso that that particular mindset IMO points to how the guy who said "Acuras are overpriced Hondas" more than likely doesn't see a good automobile in the same light as us enthusiasts. He sees a car as a car, and so forth.

 

I made a post a week or so ago about how a coworker of mine said my Acura TL was nothing more than an overpriced Honda.

Well, I went to the Cleveland Auto Show yesterday because I like cars and thought I'd check out a Honda Accord to see what the interior was like, etc.

As I expected, there was no comparison. I've heard the Accord is a wonderful car, and I believe it is, but I could easily tell the difference between the TL and the Accord. On the interior alone, I could tell the quality, fit, lines and construction of the materials is much better in the TL, as it should be.

Anyway, it was fun at the show and Honda and Acura both have some exciting car lineups.

 

No need to start a new thread about the same discussion already going on. Just continue it in here...

Merged threads...

 

wow... insecure much? You seriously let some idiot's remarks get to you, so you had to start a thread to see if the consensus was with you or with that imbecile's, then while at the auto show, you had to confirm your suspicions and the comments in this thread?

Not healthy One of the very last things you should concern yourself is what other people think, unless you use your car for a very important purpose like driving clients around.

 

Cry Much?

 

fixed.

 

hell, my es is an overpriced camry, but i paid basically the same for it as i would have a camry and it looks better.

 

Having owned both the accord (2005 Accord EX V6 Sedan no navi) and the TL (2008 TL navigation), I can't say that the TL is overpriced.

The features mentioned above (HID, better navigation, warranty, sound system, etc) are definitely worth the extra $ that I had to pay for the TL. FYI, I paid $7k for the TL vs my non-navi accord ($25.1k vs $32.1k TTL inclusive).

If I had bought the accord with navi, I would've paid around $2 - $2.5k more than the non-navi version, so the TL is only about $5k more expensive than the Accord. So $5k for all the additional features and the luxury name of Acura? No, I don't think it's overpriced.

 

When you think about it, you could all all the features from the TL onto the Accord and still save a pretty penny. Plenty of people do TSX HID retrofits, and adding better speakers isn't the most challenging job in the world.

I think most people just prefer the TL because of its design (subjective), better drivetrain (esp. now, with SH-AWD), better interior materials and "feel", and of course, the name.

On the other hand, I'm perfectly happy sacrificing the TL's extra features and pocketing an extra ten grand, most of which I could use to make my car pretty much on par with the TL.

 

IMO, there is a huge difference (as far as the interior goes) between a Honda and a TL/RL just from the loaners i've had. My cousin has an Accord V6 that i've driven plenty of times, and my sister has a Civic EX. When I had the TSX as a rental, it was pretty much in-line with the Accord V6 as far as interior goes. I don't care what anyone says, there are so many small details in the TL that completely seperate it from a typical Honda Accord. I am strictly speaking for the 3G TL, but i've been in a 4G TL and the interior is beyond great. The sound system is one of the best on the market as well, they demo'd it while I was getting my car serviced....simply mind-blowing. Did someone really just quote Bose as being good as far as modern OEM systems go? I've had my doubts about the ML system as well, but I guess the name sells it. The speakers they use in those systems (at least the SC430 I worked on that had a system overall) was pretty much on par with something you'd find in a Civic.

 

Saying that something is overpriced depends on what you consider worthwhile and what YOU can afford.
If I had bought my car new, I would agree and probably wouldn't have been able to buy it. I bought it used...for under 14K...and love every second of it. I have had numerous civics, accord, ep3, rsx...and I tinker a lot so I usually end up taking the car apart numerous times and to date, the TL seems the best constructed as far as materials and thickness of materials etc.

The new TL is amazing, but again, not willing to take on that kind of payment and there are some domestic options opening up for cheaper and a lot more performance. i.e. 2011 Mustang GT with Baer brake upgrade, 6 speed...5.0L with version of vtec that will net it 412 HP and 25mpg on a paper filter and stock exhaust. All while only being 10 pounds heavier than this year's model. I'm LUCKY if I get 24 combined mpg in my TL and I want to say that MSRP on the GT will be 33K new.