It's dark and rainy night tonight. I'm on tight, twisty, hilly Appalachian mountain roads that are wet and greasy with fallen leaves and lots of puddles. I'm moving along at a good clip, mostly alone on the roads, clipping apexes and hustling between corners in 2nd & 3rd gears, listening to sheets of rain hitting the side of the car. Some of the corners are severe enough that you can actually watch the system shift traction on the AWD display. And I'm thinking....the RL is the best car in the world for these conditions. Has to be. Nearly anything else I can think of would be in the woods if they had been trying to keep up. But it's no big deal in the RL, just another nice drive with good tunes on the stereo.

What a great car.

 

Csb!

 

I have the display on all the time - useful to see when you've got max torque to the outside rear wheel.

Yup - I have no idea where to go after a Leg End for atrocious conditions. Every other 4WD system seems a bit backward ATM.

 

The conditions you described and how well the RL performs is why the IIHS has recommended it as a good choice for teenage drivers. I watched last week's edition of MotorWeek and they had a piece about vehicles chosen by the IIHS. It's hard for me to believe that parents would buy an RL for child's first car but I understand that it's the safety factor for why it was chosen.

IIHS - Used Vehicles for Teens |MotorWeek

 

My parents thought about buying me a Humvee at 16 so I couldn't hurt myself.

 

So you think? If they also planned to ship you to Iraq I would think it was another motive.

*ducking*

 

 

Nice vid. I saw the RL at the top of one of their lists. Nice.

I took my teen down to BMW's teen performance driving school in Greenville, SC for a day, and it was well worth the money. Great program.

 

Seems a perverse logic - however is one to learn to drive/crash it properly, if the car does everything for you?

Should be a cheap, lightweight, underpowered, manual PoS.

 

Yeah, mine was a 1980 Honda Accord 5-speed sedan. I gave it quite a thrashing, but somehow I managed to get through it all alive, and as a bonus I learned how to drive!

Seems like a great way to get many of these teens (and other folks) to stop driving while staring at their phones is to make traditional manual transmissions a requirement on all cars. That alone would cure 90% of it, at least off highways.

 

We were absolutely sold on the SWAWD system after our first long trip in the RL. Driving across Wyoming with a hard, driving rain and virtual rivers of water washing across the pavement, we didn't have to slow down at all and the car felt like it was tracking on rails. There was none of that floating feeling you get when a car starts to hydroplane. It will be hard to shift to any other car after this.

 

Nah. They balked, so my dad bought me a hummer if I promised to not go crazy.

 

Was it yellow?

*ducking behind the sofa*

 

Hey Ethel, what do you think? If I was an , would I get Ricky's joke?












?

 

Wow RL for teens, that's quite a car for a teen $$$$$ but because the Asian car makers were so behind / stingy when it came to stability control you only got it in the luxury models - hell BMW had it in all their models by 2000 and Audi by 2002. The killer on wheels know as the Ford Explorer was forced to get it in 2005 to so. I'd say for teens the obvious standards -- Seat belts > ABS > Airbags > Snow tires > Stability Control > The New guys ... camera / laser stuff collision avoidance.

Here in CO I think snow tires are going to be much better than AWD on the flats in Denver area then stability control but good luck at getting anything reliable with that for $5k. So an old unreliable but safe Benz / BMW or Audi might be just what the doctor ordered.

 

What??....

Snow tires make a big difference for sure, but so does AWD if you have any turns to make/ corners to take. Your recommendation is getting an older UNreliable german made vehicle?? And you think that will be less than 5k?? No offence but that's just some bad advice.

 

Ford Exploder man... those things are terrible.

And yes, please by your kids decent rubbah.

 

I came across this video on youtube a few days ago that illustrates the effectiveness of SW-AWD compared with competitor's systems.

 

Cool video. I think a nice RL (like mine - 06 100K+ miles, well kept, $12000) is a good investment for a teenager. However, I don't think kids will like it. It is maybe a little to stodgy for them. Too bad. It is a great car. I'm glad I'm old enough now to appreciate how good a car it is.

 

This video does a decent job of explaining how SH-AWD works, but it sounds like 2nd gen RLs have a slightly different system than current Acura models. As I understand it, our RLs can vector power to either front wheel, but not separate back wheels, but he says current models have that capability. Also, he said that the RL can push a greater percentage of power to the rear wheels than what's available now.

 

Actually, all of that is backwards. The RL can vector 70% of power to the rear diff and 100% of that to either rear wheel. The TL, however, can do the same with 80-90% (don't know the exact number) of total power.

 

OK, thanks. At about 4:55 in this video there's a pop-up note that says, "the discontinued RL could vary the overdrive ratio up to 5.7% while other SW-AWD implementations are fixed between 1.5% - 1.7% faster than the front."

 

Mr. Dykes video fell short in a couple of places:

Aside from having the ratios a bit off, there is no clutch pack (i.e. "center differential") between the acceleration unit and the power output from the transfer assembly. I've pulled together the following summary, which may be useful:

Per Honda, the left/right clutches in the rear differential can be controlled to alter front/rear torque split, as well as the left-right split on the rear diff. I understand that the output shaft from the transmission is essentially connected to two points: (1) a pinion gear feeding the ring gear on the front differential; and (2) a hypoid gear feeding the rear prop shaft. In other words, the transfer case/assembly itself cannot vary the power/torque output between front & rear – the rear prop shaft and the pinion gear for the front diff will _always_ turn the same relative speed, as determined by the gear ratio in the transfer assembly.

The front differential is a standard, open differential. It relies on the VSA to actuate the front brakes to control power distribution from side-to-side.

The prop shaft enters the rear differential wherein it is sped-up by either 1.7% (fixed) or up to 5.7% (variable, RL-only) depending on the engagement of the planetary gearset in the “speed-up” unit. The output of the speed-up unit then feeds in to the rear “differential”. The rear diff essentially operates as a “locked” unit, with both left/right drive shafts turning the same (relative, per the gear ratio) speed as the rear diff input shaft. These drive shafts are then connected to the rear half-shafts via the electromagnetic clutches.

When the car is in FWD mode (e.g. during an SH-AWD fault), both clutches are de-energized, thus allowing no power transfer from the rear diff to the rear wheels. Regardless, the prop shaft & rear diff are still turning and consuming power from the engine.

In normal operation, the electro-magnetic clutches (on either side of the rear differential) can vary from partially engaged to fully-engaged. By varying the degree of engagement (and optionally the use of the “speed-up” unit), the Acura SH-AWD can send anywhere from 20%-80% of the power to the rear wheels. When the rear diff needs to “torque vector”, one of the clutches is locked up more than the other – thus shunting power to the side that needs it. The rear diff can “torque-vector” under deceleration as well. I saw that in one of Honda’s videos recently, but had never noticed it until I tested it. Definitely not nearly as dramatic as in power-on situations though.

 

Wolf, thank you for that explanation. Has Acura ever indicated why they went away from the variable ratio to the rear wheels? It seems to me like it must be an advantage over a low, fixed percentage. Does that mean the SH-AWD in the RL is a bit superior to any other Acura model? Sure seems like it from that one item.

 

I don't think that one parameter can determine if the RL is superior to other models. I say that because the TL SH-AWD will kill the RL on any road. That probably has more to do with it being lighter and having the 3.7L, but it shows that you have to consider the whole car.

Everything I have heard says that the TL SH-AWD is more aggressive than the RL. Which specs are different and by how much?

 

Acura TL[18]
The fourth generation Acura TL, introduced in late 2008 as a 2009 model has two major trim levels, a front-wheel-drive version, and an upmarket SH-AWD version. Similar in layout to the Acura RL, the Acura SH-AWD TL features a 3.7L 305 hp VTEC V-6, transversely mounted front engine in the Global Midsize Platform. The 2009 model uses a five-speed automatic transmission, but Acura has also promised a new six-speed manual transmission for the 2010 model year. It remains to be seen if the 2010 model will also feature the newly announced six-speed automatic transmission featured in the prototype Acura ZDX announced at the April 2009 New York Auto Show. Unlike the Acura RL, the SH-AWD TL does not have the Acceleration Device.

SH-AWD operating parameters include:

Up to 90 percent of available torque can be transferred to the front wheels during normal cruising.
In hard cornering and under acceleration, up to 70 percent of available torque can be directed to the rear wheels to enhance vehicle dynamics.
Up to 100 percent of the torque sent to the rear axle can be applied to either rear wheel, depending on conditions.

 

That would imply the power transfer is the same. If that was pulled from Wikipedia though, I don't trust it. Some of the info they have for the RL SH-AWD is grossly incorrect.

EDIT: I see that is a direct quote from the Acura Press Release, so never mind. http://www.hondanews.com/channels/28...7-03004c34bc9d

 

Velo:

>> Has Acura ever indicated why they went away from the variable ratio to the rear wheels? It seems to me like it must be an advantage over a low, fixed percentage. Does that mean the SH-AWD in the RL is a bit superior to any other Acura model? Sure seems like it from that one item.

I'm gonna have to agree with 007 on this one -- I don't think that it necessarily makes the RL system superior. I think you have to look at the whole vehicle: will the vehicle perform better with the two-speed rear diff vs. the single-speed? Probably so. However, I'll bet Honda figured out that the single-speed option gives you >80% of the improvement with much less cost, weight, and complexity.

 

This is exactly the type of post that I was looking for in further pushing myself to buy an RL as a daily.

 

I wasn't around (so I haven't seen the info), but I have heard that the very first iterations of the SH-AWD rear diff had some serious issues. Maybe it had to do with this variable speed-up unit, they were able to create a work around, and ditched it for later designs. Purely speculation though.