Sevenfeet

Greetings all,

Thanks to moderator Neuronbob who I know from a completely unrelated online forum, I've been lurking here for a while since I test drove a 2006 RL w/tech package last month. I've never considered buying an Acura of any kind before primarily because my online name is literally my height (or close to it...6'11" really). So finding a car to drive is as challenging as finding clothes. You just can't walk into any store and find something that fits. You literally have to go for a fitting....then and only then can you put a car on a (very) short list.

That fitting came a couple of months ago when the local auto show came through town which gives me a chance to try out lots of vehicles in one afternoon. Being able to fit in the RL was a complete surprise. It wasn't on my radar screen at all and the fit was pretty nice...better than nearly all the vehicles in the class. Only the Infinity M35/45 was comperable (and is also on my short list).

So I test drove the car at Gary Force Acura in Nashville. I've had plenty of time to digest the experience so here's my comments and hopefully the group here can answer my lingering questions.

First, the styling. I think the RL is a smart looking vehicle but certainly not out to say "hey look at me". I used to own a 2003 Caddy CTS LuxSport so I know a little bit about that line of styling. Given that Honda historically has been a bit conservative on styling, the RL's overall presentation is pleasing.

The ride was generally nice and SH-AWD does seem to live up to it's billing. Personally I think it's a good solution to overcome the RL's inherit front-wheel-drive design bias. SH-AWD is never going to be able to completely overcome the the extra weight up front and other FWD limitations, but for most drivers, I think it's enough. For me, I'm not so sure. Most of the cars I've owned have all been FWD, but driving the CTS for three years has spoiled me on RWD performance and handling. I'm still debating in my mind if SH-AWD is going to be enough for me (it was very very good). And no, I've never owned an AWD car so that's a new wrinkle too.

I have to admit I liked the gadgets as I've always been a gadget guy. The Nav system is one of the nicest I've seen and the voice recognition system was very slick. I didn't get a chance to try the Collision Mitigation system...alas, there is only so much you can do in a test drive. The XM traffic feature is nice, but not relevant to my city yet. Bluetooth integration was very nice.

The engine was smooth and power was very nice, but I have to admit I'm wondering how I'm going to feel after I do the M35 test drive. Acura gets some criticism for not having enough torque versus horsepower in their high performance engines (Honda S2000 anyone?) and those critics may have a point. Again, on first blush it seems ok but once I drive the M35, I may change that opinion. Not having a V8 is a big problem for the brand in the U.S., even though I'm not in the market for a V8 car right now. Doing a transverse V8 is only a partial solution, though Volvo has recently done the same thing with the S80.

So here are my questions at the end of the day.

Acura basically invented this market as Infinity and Lexus followed a few years later. So is it just me or is it weird that some Acura options are still dealer installed? I mean, why are the dealers installing the A-spec package which I would think would be something the factory would want to make sure is right when the car was built? Or other things like a wood steering wheel or gear shift? I mean, we're a long way from the days that Honda dealers did their own air conditioning installs on Civics way back in the day. Why are Acura dealers still doing this stuff for options others do from the factory?

Is the A-spec option mutually exclusive from the Tech Package? There doesn't seem to be anything on the Acura web site that mentions this, but the rep at the dealer said that the A-spec package couldn't be installed in a Tech package car. If so, why?

Is the noisy tires issue I keep reading about a 2005 RL issue or also in the 2006 model?

I assume the stock run flat tires are on 17" wheels? (The dealer kept saying 16" wheels).

Does iPod integration allow you to completely control the iPod's music and play lists through the Nav system (I've heard conflicting things on this).

Anyway, thanks for reading this and trying to answer my questions. I really like this car but whether I end up with one is still an open guess at this point.

Rob L

I dont think the noisy tire issue is so much the tires as it is the fact the car just allows more road nosie than one would think. However, some have said the stock tires on the 05 (so not run flats) do allow a bit more road noise than other tires so I would guess there is a bit of a diff but nothing huge. If you felt the car was fairly quiet then I'd guess it is trivial.

I guess dealers install that stuff because the market for the a-spec package is not that big so they dont want to have to monkey around with an RL here and there. Also, most likely is far easier for them to just pop out the RLs based on spec and let the dealer do its thing. Oh and the dealer makes money off installing thsoe things and am sure Honda/Acura likes throwing them a bone.

I think the RL doesnt have a true FWD bias (ok it does when going in a straight line driving along but...) and its AWD system makes the car feel more like RWD than FWD. I fail to believe anyone can truly tell the diff between RWD and FWD when a car is just puttering along in a straight line (having owned a RWD sports sedan for 4.5 years (IS300) I can't tell the diff) and when in turns the RL usually throws more torque to the rear wheels so it is RWD biased there. In addition to having driven the IS for 4.5 years I also on occasion drive another RWD sedan (LS430) and RL feels like it and handles better than it. It is my opinion many have been brought up thinking RWD is needed for top handling/driving and they will have that factor into their opinion regardless if it makes sense or not. Yes there is a difference between the typcial FWD car and the RWD but IMO the difference between the RL and a RWD sedan is minor at best especially considering the RL's system is designed for handling. I think the RL handles about as well as the IS300 and its at the limits handling is superior. THe IS was regarded by pretty much every reviewer as having great handling so that has to say something about the RL...and the RL has crappy all seaosn tires (I have a o5) while my IS had summer performance tires. If you slap performance tires on the RL I am convinced it would out handle almost every car in its class since it out handles most as is now.

Oh and I also feel an AWD system is superior for handling if it is done right which the RL system is. 4 tires being given power is better than 2. Me thinks more companies down the line will develop systems like the RL although it may be hard to get the enthusiast to accept the fact RWD isn't king even if everything may prove otherwise.

Rob L

One more thing about the RL's AWD system and the fwd bias thing...

Just to make what I said clear, yes the RL is FWD biased by default at 70/30 torque split but again, that is when you're puttering along in a straight line. If you are at a stop and mash the pedal the system will throw the torque wherever it is needed to cancel out wheel spin which IMO is better than having a system just spinning the rear wheels like crazy and the RL usually throws it to the rear wheels in this case. However, if you're doing turns or whatever (where IMO handling actually takes place) the RL almost ALWAYS sends more torque to the rear wheels and if you are doing extreme handling (which to me is where you tell of a car's true handling ability) the RL's system goes to a 30/70 split which makes the system RWD biased. Then of course is when you are really punching it around a turn and it does the distribution between the rear wheels of that 70% and the outside wheel can have 100% of that 70% torque and spins the outside rear wheel faster. I don't know how hard you drove the RL but if you didn't drive it hard then IMO you should because it has rail-like handling when pushing it hard and that is why I say it has better at the limit handling than my IS300. While your usual RWD sports sedan would be having its ass end slide out the RL just keeps gripping the road and going faster. That to me is better but to be honest I'm not a master drifter so I tried to shy away from having my IS' rear end slide out on me on public roads. I suppose if one is easily confident with drifting then they may still prefer that over the RL not cutting loose.

I think many think AWD is only good for wet road conditions but IMO AWD can and should be better for handling as well. It's a simple physics thing and again, I think that if people can get over this "RWD is needed for top handling" mentality more car Cos will start using and developing systems like the RL has....that is of course if they wish to spend the money on this. No doubt some companies stick with RWD because it is tried and true and doesn't cost them any extra cash like implementing a new AWD system would but I am confident that if they desired to put the cash towards it they could make awd systems that blow everything away.

One thing people need to remember about the RL is it weighs 4000 pounds and is a big car. It never feels as big as it is though because of its great handling.

jftjr

Apparently, yes. There's no A-spec wheels with the run-flats. If you really felt the need, you could probably have the body kit and spoiler installed, as well as the A-spec suspension parts, they're available for separate order. IMHO, though, the RL's pretty tight in stock spec, and the A-spec suspension makes the car too harsh for a daily driver.... and I think the body kit is ugly. But YMMV.

The tires on the non-Tech RL are the same from 05 to 06. Like most Honda products, the car does not come from the factory with great rubber, and they could be a little quieter -- but I don't know if it's worth $1K to re-shod a brand new car. For me, it isn't.

The run-flats on the Tech package are, of course, different tires. I don't know how they compare noise-wise to the standard Michelins, I haven't driven them side-by-side.


Car comes with 17" wheels. Your dealer needs a little education.


Yes...BUT.

The "but" is that you have to take the time to learn the interface for the iPod kit, and I have to say, it's somewhat clumsy. There's a learning curve involved, as it's not really intuitive, and it's not consistent with either the iPod's or the Acura audio system's normal operation.

Further, it ONLY works with 4th-gen or newer iPods (i.e. click wheel and video...I wound up having to buy a new iPod...but I was looking for an excuse to do so anyway....) and you must run a separate program on your computer to prepare your 'pod for use with the interface.

Once you get it set up and learn how to use it, it's fine.

EDIT: the ipod interface, however, is not "through the nav system." The display says "extension" and doesn't list your song titles and such. You hear audio cues for track listings, playlists, and such. But, you don't ever have to take your eyes off the road to control the ipod....

sotiri

aactually the runflats are on 18' wheels, you cant see this from reading the sidewall, but i read it elswehere.
I dont think you can put an a-spec on the tech package.

pmartone

I have test driven both 2006 RLs, with and without the tech package.

I was very concerned with the tire noise that was clearly audible to me during highway driving with the non-tech package RL.

My experience was that the PAX tires, available in the tech package RL, appeared to be quieter on the highway than the standard OEM tires.

Yes, I understand the tech package wheels are 18" as compared to the 17" wheels for the non-tech package RL.

I ended up buying the RL with the tech package and I'm very impressed with all three elements of the tech package (PAX tires, ACC, and CBMS).

neuronbob

Hey, sevenfeet, welcome to the forum!

Just a comment on Acura's iPod implementation: I think it sucks, whether on RL or TL. If you want a good connection, you need to go aftermarket. Trust me, the solution on the TL is even worse.

Sevenfeet

Interesting. Good to know....thanks! I might have to go back and compare a non-tech package car to get a proper comparison.

Sevenfeet

I would agree with your assertions and I think that Acura does it's best with this system to turn what would normally be a FWD biased car into something else. But having SH-AWD only is responsible for shifting torque to where it is needed. It can't make up for the inherit physics of the vehicle. Transverse mounted engines sit directly on the front axel where modern RWD sport sedans push the engine behind the front axel for better weight distribution. The RL has about 58% of the weight up front...better than the 60%+ or most front drivers but not the 54% or less of typical RWD cars. That translates to understeer. The SH-AWD system does a great job of banishing most of it, but how a car reacts to its weight balance is part of the design and its difficult to completely overcome by technology.

The second issue for doing it this way is torque steer. In a way, the design of SH-AWD and the engine help here since the available torque is less than competiting designs and only 70% of the torque makes it up front anyway. But if they put a torqueier V8 up there, than torque steer may come into play.

CGTSX2004

iTrader: (1)

I think that you forget that the SH-AWD system is an active system. Unlike most AWD systems, which are passive and respond to situations, SH-AWD can determine the required torque loads needed at each wheel and route the power there at the optimal moment instead of waiting for the slip to happen before routing power.

It's a subtle distinction, but an important one.

And as for the torque steer, the AWD system will completely eliminate that. The Audi A6 with the 4.2L V8 never had an issue with torque steer.

mrdeeno

I think it's a little more than subtle, and it's the part that Acura has failed to successfully communicate to the market.

There's 2 parts to the SH-AWD system.

AWD part delivers power to all 4 wheels like any other AWD system. So when a tire has low traction, torque is routed to where traction can be used.

SH part is the part that varies the torque between the rear wheels in order to aid in cornering. More torque will be distributed to the outside rear tire in order to accelerate that corner, in effect "steering" the car from the rear tires.

In a RWD car during intense cornering, the rear wheels can "steer" the car. SH-AWD simulates this in a FWD-based car so it will feel like a RWD car...ie the understeer feeling goes away with more throttle.

Other FWD-based AWD systems may eliminate torque steer, but these other systems don't simulate this RWD "neutral" feeling...the more throttle you give while cornering, the more understeer starts to take over.

Most people, including many dealers, can't make a distinction between all the AWD systems out there. They just group SH-AWD in with any other AWD system. So enthusiasts will certainly know and appreciate SH-AWD, but to the average MB, BMW, Lexus, Audi, Infiniti, and Acura buyer, it's just another AWD system, so they don't acknowledge this advantage of the RL.

This is a matter of handling "feel". For all out handling of FWD vs. RWD vs. AWD with the argument of weight and physics and etc., that's a whole other can of worms.

jhr3uva90

I think Acura failed to communicate SH-AWD to the dealers and salesmen. When it comes to the luxury car market, however, I don't know if there is a point to really explaining the mechanics of SH-AWD. Most of the luxury car drivers out there care about the status of the brand name moreso than the underlying technology. The only reason why they might buy any AWD system is because they heard it was "better in snow." Sorry, I'm pretty disenchanted with the mid-sized luxury car drivers right now.

Qatar

[QUOTE=jftjr]Apparently, yes. There's no A-spec wheels with the run-flats. If you really felt the need, you could probably have the body kit and spoiler installed, as well as the A-spec suspension parts, they're available for separate order. IMHO, though, the RL's pretty tight in stock spec, and the A-spec suspension makes the car too harsh for a daily driver.... and I think the body kit is ugly. But YMMV.


Correction...
You cannot change the suspension on 06 Tech, i tried that before.

jftjr

So, if you buy the A-Spec coil-over assemblies yourself (say, THESE ) you can't fit them on the Tech car? I wonder why that is... I can't imagine them changing the suspension design just for the tech package....


*shrug*

dmtza

The IPOD integration works with 3rd Generation Ipods as well. I have a 15gb 3rd gen which works fine.

RL_Cruizin

I drove the M35 before test driving the RL. I thought I was sold on the M35, and was basically just test driving the RL to satisfy myself that I gave both a fair shot. . . It was the RL test drive that sold me.. I think you may find the same. Interior is much more inviting, with better dashboard, contols, seats, and an extra info. panel above the NAV screen. Both the RL and M35 could use a little more torque. . .

aplato

I drove the AWD versions of the Mercedes E350, Infiniti M45, and Lexus GS300. Honestly, none of them were that impressive. THe thing that is unique about Acura's AWD is that is's completely dynamic. It can independently shift torque to wheels as needed. And having driven a RWD E320 for the last 3 years, I found the smooth and stable accelleration and tight handling on the RL to be absolutely wonderful.

The only thing that hurts the RL is its weight. But you'll never notice it in regular driving. Its not going to have the low-end grunt of a V-8 powered car. But the only one in this class that does is the E500 or the M45. The M45 is an UGLY car. The interior and exterior are just plain homely. The buttons inside are chinsy.

The E350 is nice. THe interior of an E class is very hansome. THe V-6 E350 has good power, but its nothing to write home about. And once loaded with goodies, the E320 is at least 57K if not more. The V-8 powered E500 is a dream to drive. The V-8 is extremely powerful. An AWD E500 is quite awesome. However, One you put NAV, phone, and all the goodies on an AWD E500 it costs about $70K! You might as well get an E55 at that point. And AWD E500s are very rare.

I'd also forgo the A-spec pack on the RL. I honestly think it looks to riced-out. Get an RL with the tech pack. Its a great car and you'll be happy.

Mike_TX

No you didn't.

There isn't an AWD version of the M45 ... only the M35. Big difference, as in 280hp V6 in the M35 v. 335hp V8 in the M45.

iNteGraz92

come on, the s2000 is a freakin 2.0/2.2L 4-banger. the only way to get any torque would be to turbo it. it's not a matter of how much torque there is, it's where it's made. hondas have plenty of torque, but it's higher in the rev range.

Tully44

Speaking of torque, I use to own a Buick Regal GS (supercharged). With traction control turned off, I could get 50 yards of rubber on the pavement before settling in. Besides a Maserati BiTurbo, a ZR-1 and a Firebird Macho T/A, never have I felt such neck-snapping acceleration then punching the Regal from a start. 280 lbs of torque available from 1400 - 3600 RPM never felt sooo good. To this day I wonder why more manufacturers do not incorporate supercharging for added muscle.

rickzamp

After writing two letters to Acura's CEO the phone call I get from Damon in california begins "It doesn't matter who you write to you have to deal with me!"

Good luck to all present and future Acura buyers. You will need it!