Bob In Miami

I love my new RL. Although some think the styling is dull, I think most would agree it grows on you quickly. And for some reason this car does not photograph well. As for interior design, I think it is perfect, dare I say better than Audi's finest.

If I could change one aspect of the car, I would retune the engine for more low end torque (i.e., give up some horsepower in exchange for more low end torque), or equip it will a larger V-6 engine. Although the current engine configuration is more than capable of powering the car (and the HP rating looks very impressive on paper), it goes about it in a rather "busy" manner. In "busy" I mean the transmission has to downshift too often for even minimal power requests. Although very smooth, it is odd that a $50,000 automobile has the engine running at 4000+ RPMs for even minor passing maneuvers. For me this is occurring in a 4000 pound automobile plus me. Add three adults and luggage and the engine/transmission will be working even harder.

The TL is a very good example of a near perfect mix of power vs. torque. Passing in that car was possible without the [automatic] transmission downshifting. The lockup feature of the torque converter might release, but acceleration was more a low RPM event. Seeing RPMs above 4000 meant I was having fun with the car; high RPMs were not a normal everyday occurrence.

Another benefit of a larger engine might be better fuel economy since the engine / transmission team would not be working so hard. I suggest a 4000 pound vehicle with 256 lb/ft of torque at 5000 RPMs is not sufficient for people shopping for this class of car. A six speed tranny would be nice, but what is really needed is more engine displacement.

Here is a radical torque solution that I am certain will be VERY unpopular, but a turbo diesel option along the idea of the Mercedes E320 Bluetek engine would be of interest me. I know Honda is working on bringing diesel power to the US, however at this point in Acura's history a diesel powered Acura is probably beyond consideration. Also, this configuration probably would boost fuel mileage ratings to about 25/36. Just my $.0.02 from a diesel engine fan (Jetta TDI in the family).

I accept the powertrain characteristics of the vehicle, however I willing to bet (and sales numbers seem to bear this out) it is off putting to most folks shopping for a $50,000 automobile.

Bob

Costco

Hence the outcry for a V8. But, to no avail.

Bob In Miami

V-8 probably not an option with the current car and SH-AWD. Also the extra weight of that configuration would not bode well for handling, hence my suggestion of a larger displacment V-6.

Bob

neuronbob

"I don't condone it, but I understand". Honda seems to love high-revving engines, even in their V6 (J-series) range, and the TL and RL are simply the most expensive and latest examples.

The TL's low-end torque is really not that impressive, either, but it takes no trouble to get the engine up to 3k rpm, where the action and fun finally start. I frankly don't find the RL that different. The gearing is a little different, which also has an effect on things.

With that said, I think the RL next year will get the MDX's 3.7 liter V6. I don't ever see a V8 in the 2G RL's future, though. Maybe 3G RL will have a V10 from the new NSX?

Mike_TX

Having owned and driven a gasoline direct-injection engined car, I'll tell you that one change makes a huge difference in engine response. And yeah, it's an engineering exercise to go direct injection, but it's getting to be more commonplace.

If Acura would take even the existing 3.5 liter, apply direct injection (and the higher compression ratio that allows), add variable intake geometry, and expand VTEC to more than two stages (IOW, "real" variable intake/exhaust cam timing), we'd see probably 25-30 more hp, more torque and a LOT more responsive engine. Then, a change to the shift algorithm for more spirited response on that end, and the RL would be competitive with most anything out there.

What I think is at work here (as much as anything) is that Acura wants the RL to be a more sedate, more "refined" cruiser rather than a more spirited performer. That's why throttle tip-in is conservative and shift response is "relaxed". And I understand their thinking ... they're playing more to the country club set than the boy racers.

But ... push the RL and it will step up pretty doggone well. In fact, it's deceiving, because speed builds faster than you think it is. The quietness and smoothness obscures the fact you're moving faster than you might think. The car is tuned to get you to highway speeds without drama, so you don't get the boot in the rear of some cars, but the speedo cranks around there pretty smartly when you really toe the go-pedal.

Still, I'd like to see the extra punch direct injection would provide, along with maybe a switchable "Sport" mode (a la Lexus IS and GS) for those who want more throttle and transmission response.
.
.

Rich in NC

Several years ago I was in Japan when the NSX was released. It was even obvious then the NSX was on the short side of power with some of it's current peers, and even more importantly, what would be coming out soon.

Same thing with most of their cars over the years.
A design engineer in Japan told me Honda really means in Japanese "two cylinders short"!

If you think about it it's been that way with almost every model. It took years to get a V6 in the Accord and so on.

The RL is a very good car, but like always, "2 cylinders short"

Abe_Froman

iTrader: (5)

Holy cow that thing is clean! Do you mind sharing how much you got it for?

truonghthe

Its clean because its was new, 12 years ago

HDNBenjamin

lol

Abe_Froman

iTrader: (5)

Lol wow I'm an idiot. I meant to post this on another thread. No clue how it ended up here...