Why is everyone hating on the RLX?
04-12-2013, 10:11 AM
#81
2012 Cadillac CTS-V Coupe
I saw that CR review as well... But this is how I would describe what might be going on. Back to the 09-10-11 TL... It was a love hate relationship with 08-07 TL owners... But I am one who liked the cutting edge styling of the 2010 TL SH-AWD..So mixed with the bad economy and slow sales and thinking it was styling, Acura decided to Tone Down the TL in the 2012 model. For Me BIG mistake. Now I am sure many have see the new Honda Accord.. They got it right with styling... Now look at the new Infinity Q-50, they got it right as did BMW, Benz, Jag and Audi.. The problem is YES, the RLX is a nice OK looking car. Not Bad, Not Great, just OK... But Acura got scared with the TL, and went way to far in NOT making cars look like concept cars... I think the RLX will pick up when they introduce the Electric Rear wheel drive version. No telling what that will cost? Acura needs to Re-Think its design team.... If they don't get more aggressive, like they did with the 2009-10 SH-AWD TL ( You have to love the Dual Exhaust) they will find their cars aging real fast. I was keeping my fingers crossed that I was the only one who felt this way, but now that the reviewers are beginning to say the same thing, I feel bad for Acura who tried to do something unique.. For $55-$60K ones expectations should be very high. I need to take my TL in for an oil change next week, so I hope to drive a RLX and check it out. Looking forward also to the 2014 MDX. That will remain their FLAGSHIP car for years to come!
I saw another new Accord today and I REALLY like that car.
04-12-2013, 10:33 AM
#82
Three Wheelin'
Think about this. The TL, ZDX and MDX were designed in southern CA. The RL and RLX were designed in Japan. Maybe the location influences the design?
04-12-2013, 12:47 PM
#83
CTSV,TL, Audi Q7 & A5SB
I saw that CR review as well... But this is how I would describe what might be going on. Back to the 09-10-11 TL... It was a love hate relationship with 08-07 TL owners... But I am one who liked the cutting edge styling of the 2010 TL SH-AWD..So mixed with the bad economy and slow sales and thinking it was styling, Acura decided to Tone Down the TL in the 2012 model. For Me BIG mistake. Now I am sure many have see the new Honda Accord.. They got it right with styling... Now look at the new Infinity Q-50, they got it right as did BMW, Benz, Jag and Audi.. The problem is YES, the RLX is a nice OK looking car. Not Bad, Not Great, just OK... But Acura got scared with the TL, and went way to far in NOT making cars look like concept cars... I think the RLX will pick up when they introduce the Electric Rear wheel drive version. No telling what that will cost? Acura needs to Re-Think its design team.... If they don't get more aggressive, like they did with the 2009-10 SH-AWD TL ( You have to love the Dual Exhaust) they will find their cars aging real fast. I was keeping my fingers crossed that I was the only one who felt this way, but now that the reviewers are beginning to say the same thing, I feel bad for Acura who tried to do something unique.. For $55-$60K ones expectations should be very high. I need to take my TL in for an oil change next week, so I hope to drive a RLX and check it out. Looking forward also to the 2014 MDX. That will remain their FLAGSHIP car for years to come!
Last edited by JT4; 04-12-2013 at 12:49 PM.
04-12-2013, 01:06 PM
#84
You'll Never Walk Alone
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Age: 37
Posts: 9,492
Received 834 Likes
on
518 Posts
to clarify, yes, it is the traction control that cuts power as soon as a hint of slip is detected.
8 speed transmission does not delay between shifts on it's way up, floor it and it will keep rpm's climbing into 6k, but not to red line.
The car has as much power as it claims it has, but it's definitely not using all of it in the first two gears.
On the highway this car is a beast in manual shift mode where you don't have to be in a random gear, you keep it in lowest gear and the car kicks @$$.
For comparison, I was messing around with a 2013 Charger R/T the other day, he pulled into the right parking lane and sling shotted out in front of a line of cars off the red, I was nice enough to do the same from a turning lane (this is obviously fiction as I would never do that).
Let's just say the Charger wasn't ahead by the time we hit 60 and that car gets pretty loud at high rpm. Charger driver was not amused. I do think he was eventually going to catch up, but then again, it would be sad if a V8 wasn't worth it's mpg.
8 speed transmission does not delay between shifts on it's way up, floor it and it will keep rpm's climbing into 6k, but not to red line.
The car has as much power as it claims it has, but it's definitely not using all of it in the first two gears.
On the highway this car is a beast in manual shift mode where you don't have to be in a random gear, you keep it in lowest gear and the car kicks @$$.
For comparison, I was messing around with a 2013 Charger R/T the other day, he pulled into the right parking lane and sling shotted out in front of a line of cars off the red, I was nice enough to do the same from a turning lane (this is obviously fiction as I would never do that).
Let's just say the Charger wasn't ahead by the time we hit 60 and that car gets pretty loud at high rpm. Charger driver was not amused. I do think he was eventually going to catch up, but then again, it would be sad if a V8 wasn't worth it's mpg.
As for street racing, great win for you, but there are too many variables involved. I just took on a Eclipse yesterday with my little yaris with 4AT and 100hp or something. He was trying to do the same thing as that charger driver. He just couldn't pass me...lol....Back to your race, I think your Genesis 3.8 is a mid to high 14 car that traps at 97-98mph or so. The Charger RT is a high 13's car that traps at a bit over 100mph. It's some difference and as noted by you, he's catching up in the end, which is not surprising. I doubt that he used the brake torquing technique so the advantage is really not much.
Last edited by iforyou; 04-12-2013 at 01:12 PM.
04-12-2013, 04:50 PM
#86
Its been mentioned many times on another thread that there were many FWD cars with rear hump. Not all, but many.
04-12-2013, 05:32 PM
#87
You'll Never Walk Alone
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Age: 37
Posts: 9,492
Received 834 Likes
on
518 Posts
May be the AWD model needs that hump?
It's just weird that they have to withhold power for the first two gears when there's really not all that much power. Manufacturers usually do that only to FWD vehicles to prevent torque steer.
As for street racing, great win for you, but there are too many variables involved. I just took on a Eclipse yesterday with my little yaris with 4AT and 100hp or something. He was trying to do the same thing as that charger driver. He just couldn't pass me...lol....Back to your race, I think your Genesis 3.8 is a mid to high 14 car that traps at 97-98mph or so. The Charger RT is a high 13's car that traps at a bit over 100mph. It's some difference and as noted by you, he's catching up in the end, which is not surprising. I doubt that he used the brake torquing technique so the advantage is really not much.
It's just weird that they have to withhold power for the first two gears when there's really not all that much power. Manufacturers usually do that only to FWD vehicles to prevent torque steer.
As for street racing, great win for you, but there are too many variables involved. I just took on a Eclipse yesterday with my little yaris with 4AT and 100hp or something. He was trying to do the same thing as that charger driver. He just couldn't pass me...lol....Back to your race, I think your Genesis 3.8 is a mid to high 14 car that traps at 97-98mph or so. The Charger RT is a high 13's car that traps at a bit over 100mph. It's some difference and as noted by you, he's catching up in the end, which is not surprising. I doubt that he used the brake torquing technique so the advantage is really not much.
04-12-2013, 08:05 PM
#88
either way, RLX is not as quick as either of them.
And the Genesis is much larger and more refined than the Charger, it also looks like a limo vs a cop magnet.
I really do hope the electric RLX will break into the high 4's for the acceleration to 60 just to wake everyone up...
And the Genesis is much larger and more refined than the Charger, it also looks like a limo vs a cop magnet.
I really do hope the electric RLX will break into the high 4's for the acceleration to 60 just to wake everyone up...
That's correct. However, I'm referring to things such as the location of all the extra electronics for the hybrid system.
I went to check up some numbers for both the new Charger RT and Genesis 3.8. The Charger RT now makes 370hp and is over 4200lb. Genesis 3.8 makes 333hp with a curb weight of over 3800lb. For both cars, the power to weight ratio is approximately 11.5lb per hp. While the Charger makes a lot more torque, the Genesis makes it up with its more advanced 8AT (3 more ratios than the Charger). Based on that, both cars should have roughly the same acceleration. However, based on several road tests, it's safe to say that the Charger RT is pretty much as fast as the Genesis R-Spec.
I went to check up some numbers for both the new Charger RT and Genesis 3.8. The Charger RT now makes 370hp and is over 4200lb. Genesis 3.8 makes 333hp with a curb weight of over 3800lb. For both cars, the power to weight ratio is approximately 11.5lb per hp. While the Charger makes a lot more torque, the Genesis makes it up with its more advanced 8AT (3 more ratios than the Charger). Based on that, both cars should have roughly the same acceleration. However, based on several road tests, it's safe to say that the Charger RT is pretty much as fast as the Genesis R-Spec.
04-12-2013, 09:55 PM
#89
04-13-2013, 09:11 AM
#90
Burning Brakes
either way, RLX is not as quick as either of them.
And the Genesis is much larger and more refined than the Charger, it also looks like a limo vs a cop magnet.
I really do hope the electric RLX will break into the high 4's for the acceleration to 60 just to wake everyone up...
And the Genesis is much larger and more refined than the Charger, it also looks like a limo vs a cop magnet.
I really do hope the electric RLX will break into the high 4's for the acceleration to 60 just to wake everyone up...
04-13-2013, 09:20 AM
#91
Senior Moderator
Even if the acceleration is in the 5 second range that would get my attention. If that, it would be no slouch for such a heavy car for which the drivetrain is a backwards NSX drivetrain. Of course the quarter is a fuller measure but that's just me.
04-13-2013, 09:38 AM
#92
Burning Brakes
I would expect 6ish range. Of course I'm not prescient but we'll see in due time. (Acura time that is)
Last edited by g37guy01; 04-13-2013 at 09:41 AM.
04-13-2013, 12:30 PM
#93
Not sure if it will keep it up all the way through the quarter but I did see RLX quoted as 5.9s without electric help so it's possible for it to be close with 370hp.
My guess is low 5's for the 70k hybrid.
I wonder if a tax credit would apply...that would bring it into 65k reality...that might work.
04-13-2013, 01:23 PM
#94
Burning Brakes
Edmunds test is 6.5. Zeroto60times shows 5.8.
Like every other car test comparison, these numbers will be all over the map with the lowest number being quoted as the "gold standard".
Like every other car test comparison, these numbers will be all over the map with the lowest number being quoted as the "gold standard".
Last edited by g37guy01; 04-13-2013 at 01:26 PM.
04-13-2013, 02:53 PM
#95
Three Wheelin'
Why are people hating on the P-AWS version of the RLX? Because it appears Acura brought a knife to a gun fight. The only way I'd get one is if a new RLX costs the same as a CPO Lexus GS 350.
Oh well, hopefully we'll see the hybrid version soon.
Oh well, hopefully we'll see the hybrid version soon.
04-13-2013, 07:34 PM
#96
that car is more nose heavy 62/38 than RLX. some thing is clearly wrong with RLX test at Edmunds.
There is not much grip in these tires.
http://www.edmunds.com/car-reviews/t...ma-3-5-sl.html
Tire Brand: Michelin
Tire Model: Primacy MxM4
Tire Type: All-season, low rolling resistanceAs-Tested Curb Weight (lb): 3,531
Slalom: The Accord feels much faster in the slalom than it actually is, and as has been the case for some time now, its tires cannot cash the check written by its otherwise willing chassis. It's fun and willing, and there's even a tendency to oversteer with ESC shut off. And while that's all fun stuff, it's not the fastest way through. Best run was slow in/fast out, saving the slide for the exit gate. ESC is loud, but quick-acting and not a total buzzkill. It quickly does its corrections and then goes away
Tire Brand: Michelin
Tire Model: Primacy MxM4
Tire Type: All-season, low rolling resistanceAs-Tested Curb Weight (lb): 3,531
Slalom: The Accord feels much faster in the slalom than it actually is, and as has been the case for some time now, its tires cannot cash the check written by its otherwise willing chassis. It's fun and willing, and there's even a tendency to oversteer with ESC shut off. And while that's all fun stuff, it's not the fastest way through. Best run was slow in/fast out, saving the slide for the exit gate. ESC is loud, but quick-acting and not a total buzzkill. It quickly does its corrections and then goes away
04-13-2013, 10:50 PM
#97
this is one of those times you should have done your research before posting
Michelin Primacy MXM4 (Grand Touring All-Season 205/55R16 91H)
http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tests/...y.jsp?ttid=138
What We Liked: Excellent wet traction and good road manners
What We'd Improve: There's not much that needs improvement
Conclusion: A very capable Grand Touring All-Season tire
Michelin Primacy MXM4 (Grand Touring All-Season 205/55R16 91H)
http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tests/...y.jsp?ttid=138
What We Liked: Excellent wet traction and good road manners
What We'd Improve: There's not much that needs improvement
Conclusion: A very capable Grand Touring All-Season tire
You do realize that Edmunds have tested EXL-V6 Accord 0-60 in 6.1 second with handling identical to RLX with narrower and taller profile tires.
that car is more nose heavy 62/38 than RLX. some thing is clearly wrong with RLX test at Edmunds.
There is not much grip in these tires.
http://automobiles.honda.com/accord-...fications.aspx
that car is more nose heavy 62/38 than RLX. some thing is clearly wrong with RLX test at Edmunds.
There is not much grip in these tires.
http://automobiles.honda.com/accord-...fications.aspx
04-13-2013, 11:37 PM
#98
this is one of those times you should have done your research before posting
Michelin Primacy MXM4 (Grand Touring All-Season 205/55R16 91H)
http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tests/...y.jsp?ttid=138
What We Liked: Excellent wet traction and good road manners
What We'd Improve: There's not much that needs improvement
Conclusion: A very capable Grand Touring All-Season tire
Michelin Primacy MXM4 (Grand Touring All-Season 205/55R16 91H)
http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tests/...y.jsp?ttid=138
What We Liked: Excellent wet traction and good road manners
What We'd Improve: There's not much that needs improvement
Conclusion: A very capable Grand Touring All-Season tire
can compete with High Performance All season with extra wide profile of 235 on Altima vs 215 on Accord.
As i said Edmunds always compare apples to Orange. You should admit it that Edmunds testing is highly unreliable.
http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tires....toModel=Altima Sedan&autoModClar=3.5 SL
2013 Nissan Altima Sedan 3.5 SL
SP Sport 7000 A/S(High Performance All-Season) The SP Sport 7000 A/S is one of Dunlop's High Performance All-Season radials developed for Original Equipment use on sporty sedans. The SP Sport 7000 A/S is designed to combine low noise, good ride comfort and dependable handling while blending traction on dry and wet roads, as well as in light snow
2013 Nissan Altima Sedan 3.5 SL
SP Sport 7000 A/S(High Performance All-Season) The SP Sport 7000 A/S is one of Dunlop's High Performance All-Season radials developed for Original Equipment use on sporty sedans. The SP Sport 7000 A/S is designed to combine low noise, good ride comfort and dependable handling while blending traction on dry and wet roads, as well as in light snow
04-13-2013, 11:42 PM
#99
Here is tire on 2011 535 that Edmunds were comparing RLX .
Again it is Max Performance Summer with only 240 life span. light weight and extra wide 275 rear profile.
RLX tire 500 UTQG. Among the longest life on Grand touring.
Again it is Max Performance Summer with only 240 life span. light weight and extra wide 275 rear profile.
RLX tire 500 UTQG. Among the longest life on Grand touring.
04-13-2013, 11:51 PM
#101
I only said Accord is more nose heavy than RLX and has less wide tires. so how it can handle same as RLX. Also performance of Accord faster than RLX which does not make sense. RLX has DI engine, Premium fuel and wider tires.
There is no consistency in there testing.
It is whole another issue that they were proclaiming BMW 535 handle slightly better than RLX when in fact the tire setup is totally different.
The following users liked this post:
BDoggPrelude (04-16-2013)
04-14-2013, 09:13 AM
#103
04-15-2013, 01:38 PM
#104
You'll Never Walk Alone
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Age: 37
Posts: 9,492
Received 834 Likes
on
518 Posts
either way, RLX is not as quick as either of them.
And the Genesis is much larger and more refined than the Charger, it also looks like a limo vs a cop magnet.
I really do hope the electric RLX will break into the high 4's for the acceleration to 60 just to wake everyone up...
And the Genesis is much larger and more refined than the Charger, it also looks like a limo vs a cop magnet.
I really do hope the electric RLX will break into the high 4's for the acceleration to 60 just to wake everyone up...
Well yea of course, we are talking about a difference of 23hp difference and 100lb!! lol...
I personally like the Chrysler 300C, rather than the Charger. I must say that a black charger with some black rims can possibly confuse other cops that it is an undercover car!
electricity is good that way, you get full power on the spot which makes silly New York City hybrids really quick off the line.
Not sure if it will keep it up all the way through the quarter but I did see RLX quoted as 5.9s without electric help so it's possible for it to be close with 370hp.
My guess is low 5's for the 70k hybrid.
I wonder if a tax credit would apply...that would bring it into 65k reality...that might work.
Not sure if it will keep it up all the way through the quarter but I did see RLX quoted as 5.9s without electric help so it's possible for it to be close with 370hp.
My guess is low 5's for the 70k hybrid.
I wonder if a tax credit would apply...that would bring it into 65k reality...that might work.
Edmunds test is 6.5s indeed, but with roll out, it's 6.2s. When you look at numbers from most mags, those include the 1ft roll out. We need to compare apples to apples here. I think that's the first test anyway. Edmunds are usually on the slower side of thing as they don't abuse cars as much as others.
Consider this, the Audi S6 at over 4400lb has 420hp. It does 0-60mph in just 3.7 seconds. Not sure how heavy the RLX AWD is, but it's been said that its hybrid system is supposed to be lighter than the current SH-AWD system, which is at 250lb. We are probably looking at 4300lb, 375hp, with instant torque at 0 rpm. I think 0-60mph in the 4's is a possibility
04-16-2013, 01:13 PM
#105
Instructor
Acura is drifting further into an abyss. They had gold with the 3G TL. It was a FWD sports compact that was a or near a sales leader in its segment. The 2G RL was well received but a slow seller due to its bland looks. They completely botched the 4G TL and mangled the MMC 2G RL with the horrific looks.
The RLX is dead in the water as a $50k FWD mid sized luxury sedan. It offers nothing that all it's competitors already have. I see no reason to get one. I have and love my 3G TL that I bought brand new in 2005. I am making significantly more than I did in 2005. I will not stay with Acura based on its trend. It came out with an under powered ILX with an antiquated 5 speed drive train. The TLX will be a train wreck. I anticipate that the SH AWD will go away or be prohibitively expensive to turn off buyers.
The RLX is dead in the water as a $50k FWD mid sized luxury sedan. It offers nothing that all it's competitors already have. I see no reason to get one. I have and love my 3G TL that I bought brand new in 2005. I am making significantly more than I did in 2005. I will not stay with Acura based on its trend. It came out with an under powered ILX with an antiquated 5 speed drive train. The TLX will be a train wreck. I anticipate that the SH AWD will go away or be prohibitively expensive to turn off buyers.
Have to agree with most of this post, people are hating because there is nothing special about this car, to make things worse the car is fugly.
The front end looks ridiculous with those headlights, who the hell came up with that?
How does Honda get it right with the Accord and then they give Acura buyers this crap.
Unreal...
04-16-2013, 06:30 PM
#106
acura has some problems.
i always had honda's when i was raising a family.
as life got better i moved to acura.for performance over luxury.
i had the 87 legend coupe,02 tls,and 07 tl.
i couldnt accept the new tl styling,and the rl body style was on its way out.
so i got a bmw 535.
my wife has a 13 rdx tech,that replaced her 08 base.
no problems,looks good,rides good,good value.
i would rather buy a new accord over any acura car today.acura styling is hurting.
both acura and honda are very conservative with change.
now in my life i have the cash to buy acura,over honda,but they dont make any cars i like.they should have paid more attention to the previous rl,and they should have kept the nsx alive...if they were still making that old style nsx with some refreshes,i would have went with one. why are they waiting so long to bring it back?
acura used to be out in front,they lost a lot of ground.
when they lose repeat customers like me,you run the risk of not getting them back.
i always had honda's when i was raising a family.
as life got better i moved to acura.for performance over luxury.
i had the 87 legend coupe,02 tls,and 07 tl.
i couldnt accept the new tl styling,and the rl body style was on its way out.
so i got a bmw 535.
my wife has a 13 rdx tech,that replaced her 08 base.
no problems,looks good,rides good,good value.
i would rather buy a new accord over any acura car today.acura styling is hurting.
both acura and honda are very conservative with change.
now in my life i have the cash to buy acura,over honda,but they dont make any cars i like.they should have paid more attention to the previous rl,and they should have kept the nsx alive...if they were still making that old style nsx with some refreshes,i would have went with one. why are they waiting so long to bring it back?
acura used to be out in front,they lost a lot of ground.
when they lose repeat customers like me,you run the risk of not getting them back.
04-16-2013, 07:30 PM
#107
Sonor Kid 2...I must say that I agree with you, the front looks odd with the Jewel eyes, its a great concept but not well executed. I often asked myself the same question, how can they have designed the Accord so well but couldn't do something even sexier for their upscale/power division? The IL looks good but they missed the mark with the 2.0L engine, the RDX was really well done overall (and the sales figures reflect it)....I am worried about the new MDX. Its interior looks good but I feel its exterior has lost some of its edginess and may not age as well since its looks too alike its previous gen minus the parts that really give it aggressiveness.
When the ILX and the RDX came out, I felt that Acura had found their way back, the the Honda Accord came out as with the early MMC of the Civic and I thought...Oh yeah, they are back and this will be great for the brand. The NSX concept was showcased and looked amazing, and things were going so well (design wise) and then the RLX came out....all of a suden, I am really fearful of the TLX.
When the ILX and the RDX came out, I felt that Acura had found their way back, the the Honda Accord came out as with the early MMC of the Civic and I thought...Oh yeah, they are back and this will be great for the brand. The NSX concept was showcased and looked amazing, and things were going so well (design wise) and then the RLX came out....all of a suden, I am really fearful of the TLX.
04-16-2013, 10:39 PM
#108
Advanced
Join Date: Feb 2006
Age: 52
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think people don't like it because it looks like an older persons car...meaning Buick material. Yep, new is nice and all, but I'm 41 and I'd rather drive my 2G RL, and will probably just get a new Lexus GS when I feel like it.
04-17-2013, 12:14 AM
#109
Three Wheelin'
Lexus GS is a really nice car. I'm impressed with it!
04-17-2013, 09:18 AM
#111
I need to have a look at the new GS. I bought one in 2008 pretty much fully loaded with ML and AWD. I was almost I different to buying the GS or RL or even Infiniti M. It came down to dealer hassle factor. It asked for invoice less incentives for the RL and invoice plus $500 for the GS. Acura dealer played games, so I signed for the GS. This was about a month or two before the new model year cars were delivered.
Initially I liked the GS, then over time became bored with it. Nothing at all wrong with car, in fact the car was almost bulletproof and I got excellent resale for it. What's the point of all this? I bought a very cable, but uninspiring car from Lexus, which for no logical reason has turned me off Lexus for a while. The new models seem much better, but I didn't even bother to look, even though the dealer was very close when I went to look at the Audis. Went for lunch instead..
This new RLX seems to have the same effect on me. Capable and logical, but uninspiring. Good candidate perhaps for some reaching up to a mid level luxury car but uninspiring for many of those already in the segment looking to replace.
Initially I liked the GS, then over time became bored with it. Nothing at all wrong with car, in fact the car was almost bulletproof and I got excellent resale for it. What's the point of all this? I bought a very cable, but uninspiring car from Lexus, which for no logical reason has turned me off Lexus for a while. The new models seem much better, but I didn't even bother to look, even though the dealer was very close when I went to look at the Audis. Went for lunch instead..
This new RLX seems to have the same effect on me. Capable and logical, but uninspiring. Good candidate perhaps for some reaching up to a mid level luxury car but uninspiring for many of those already in the segment looking to replace.
The following users liked this post:
jhr3uva90 (04-17-2013)
04-17-2013, 12:04 PM
#112
You'll Never Walk Alone
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Age: 37
Posts: 9,492
Received 834 Likes
on
518 Posts
acura has some problems.
i always had honda's when i was raising a family.
as life got better i moved to acura.for performance over luxury.
i had the 87 legend coupe,02 tls,and 07 tl.
i couldnt accept the new tl styling,and the rl body style was on its way out.
so i got a bmw 535.
my wife has a 13 rdx tech,that replaced her 08 base.
no problems,looks good,rides good,good value.
i would rather buy a new accord over any acura car today.acura styling is hurting.
both acura and honda are very conservative with change.
now in my life i have the cash to buy acura,over honda,but they dont make any cars i like.they should have paid more attention to the previous rl,and they should have kept the nsx alive...if they were still making that old style nsx with some refreshes,i would have went with one. why are they waiting so long to bring it back?
acura used to be out in front,they lost a lot of ground.
when they lose repeat customers like me,you run the risk of not getting them back.
i always had honda's when i was raising a family.
as life got better i moved to acura.for performance over luxury.
i had the 87 legend coupe,02 tls,and 07 tl.
i couldnt accept the new tl styling,and the rl body style was on its way out.
so i got a bmw 535.
my wife has a 13 rdx tech,that replaced her 08 base.
no problems,looks good,rides good,good value.
i would rather buy a new accord over any acura car today.acura styling is hurting.
both acura and honda are very conservative with change.
now in my life i have the cash to buy acura,over honda,but they dont make any cars i like.they should have paid more attention to the previous rl,and they should have kept the nsx alive...if they were still making that old style nsx with some refreshes,i would have went with one. why are they waiting so long to bring it back?
acura used to be out in front,they lost a lot of ground.
when they lose repeat customers like me,you run the risk of not getting them back.
The original NSX was built when Soichiro Honda was still alive. It was designed/built at a time when Honda was extremely successful in F1. How can one bridge the gap between F1 success and the Accord and Civic? That's where the NSX came in. Perhaps Soichiro Honda's idea was to update the NSX just like every other Honda model. However, he passed away and Honda management instead considered the NSX as a special model, and it never got proper updates in its whole life span.
04-17-2013, 12:24 PM
#113
Three Wheelin'
I must admit, the GS's mouse is a pain. I believe it is configurable, though, to make it more responsive.
04-17-2013, 12:51 PM
#114
Instructor
IMO, there is no comparison between the RLX interior and the GS interior. I dislike the Lexus interior, and almost all German brand interiors for that matter. I love the RLX interior.
04-17-2013, 01:42 PM
#115
Three Wheelin'
04-17-2013, 01:54 PM
#116
Instructor
Sonor Kid 2...I must say that I agree with you, the front looks odd with the Jewel eyes, its a great concept but not well executed. I often asked myself the same question, how can they have designed the Accord so well but couldn't do something even sexier for their upscale/power division? The IL looks good but they missed the mark with the 2.0L engine, the RDX was really well done overall (and the sales figures reflect it)....I am worried about the new MDX. Its interior looks good but I feel its exterior has lost some of its edginess and may not age as well since its looks too alike its previous gen minus the parts that really give it aggressiveness.
When the ILX and the RDX came out, I felt that Acura had found their way back, the the Honda Accord came out as with the early MMC of the Civic and I thought...Oh yeah, they are back and this will be great for the brand. The NSX concept was showcased and looked amazing, and things were going so well (design wise) and then the RLX came out....all of a suden, I am really fearful of the TLX.
When the ILX and the RDX came out, I felt that Acura had found their way back, the the Honda Accord came out as with the early MMC of the Civic and I thought...Oh yeah, they are back and this will be great for the brand. The NSX concept was showcased and looked amazing, and things were going so well (design wise) and then the RLX came out....all of a suden, I am really fearful of the TLX.
I felt the same way after seeing the RDX, Accord and ILX, then the RLX hit the press and I was like really, this is Acura's flagship vehicle?
I needed a new car recently so I decided on an ILX 2.0 premium that I just leased back in September, I really liked the overall design and thought it was a sharp little car. Having had numerous TL's and MDX's in the past I was worried about the power but really craved the mileage. Honestly the 2 liter engine isn't that bad, reminds me of my old CRX, Del Sol and Civic's, around town it gets up and goes. It's also a fun car to drive but most of all I liked the interior and the body style.
I'm sure the RLX is a nice car in many respects as is the current TL but I can't get over the exterior execution of either one, the exterior design is just not there for me on either car.
I'm hoping by the time my lease is up on the ILX there will be a new TLX in place that I'm crazy about, we'll see...
Otherwise I may buy a new Accord V6 touring edition and save some cash!
04-17-2013, 03:49 PM
#117
Drifting
My parents just bought a 2013 Accord Touring and it is an amazing car. When their 2003 Accord EX-V6 was totaled they asked me for advice on what new car to buy. Knowing that I own 2 Acura's, they were asking me about Acura's lineup and what I though. I told them that, unless they were dead set on having AWD and were going to fork out $40k+ for a TL SH-AWD, to not even waste their time going to the dealership. I told them to look no further than the Accord Touring. At $33k, the Accord Touring absolutely decimates every sedan in Acura's current lineup once you start comparing what you get for your money. Comparing the features you get in a similarly priced TSX is laughable. When you look at what "extras" you get in a fully loaded RLX for nearly double the price of an Accord Touring, the very short list you come up with is appalling to say the least.
Honda needs to do a better job of separating these brands. Sure, the RLX uses higher grade materials, has a few more features, 4WS and a higher tech engine but does all of that even come close to amounting to the nearly $30k more you pay over a fully loaded Accord? Had the fully loaded RLX SH-SH-AWD come out and been priced in the low $60k range with significantly better exterior styling and a sub-5 second 0-60 time, it would be a completely different story.
Honda needs to do a better job of separating these brands. Sure, the RLX uses higher grade materials, has a few more features, 4WS and a higher tech engine but does all of that even come close to amounting to the nearly $30k more you pay over a fully loaded Accord? Had the fully loaded RLX SH-SH-AWD come out and been priced in the low $60k range with significantly better exterior styling and a sub-5 second 0-60 time, it would be a completely different story.
04-17-2013, 04:32 PM
#118
Three Wheelin'
1. You're comparing the Ohio-made Accord to the RLX made in Japan and shipped to the USA. The TL would have been a closer comparison n
2. I haven't driven the new Accord yet, but I do remember comparing the 2005 Accord to the 2005 RL. It was a big difference.
3. 2013 Accord V6 has 278 horsepower to the RLX's 310. Again, maybe the Accord should be compared to the TL instead.
4. We have no idea how much is costs Honda to develop or manufacture P-AWS, since they've never done it fora V6 sedan before.
5. RLX has longer wheelbase.
6. Accord's high-end premium audio system cannot compete with the RLX's low-end standard system.
7. RLX's multiview camera is standard and superior to Accord's.
8. Who knows how much Agile Handling Assist costs to develop,or manufacture?
The new Accord is an impressive and attractive car. The devil's in the details, though.
2. I haven't driven the new Accord yet, but I do remember comparing the 2005 Accord to the 2005 RL. It was a big difference.
3. 2013 Accord V6 has 278 horsepower to the RLX's 310. Again, maybe the Accord should be compared to the TL instead.
4. We have no idea how much is costs Honda to develop or manufacture P-AWS, since they've never done it fora V6 sedan before.
5. RLX has longer wheelbase.
6. Accord's high-end premium audio system cannot compete with the RLX's low-end standard system.
7. RLX's multiview camera is standard and superior to Accord's.
8. Who knows how much Agile Handling Assist costs to develop,or manufacture?
The new Accord is an impressive and attractive car. The devil's in the details, though.
04-17-2013, 04:45 PM
#119
Drifting
1. You're comparing the Ohio-made Accord to the RLX made in Japan and shipped to the USA. The TL would have been a closer comparison n
2. I haven't driven the new Accord yet, but I do remember comparing the 2005 Accord to the 2005 RL. It was a big difference.
3. 2013 Accord V6 has 278 horsepower to the RLX's 310. Again, maybe the Accord should be compared to the TL instead.
4. We have no idea how much is costs Honda to develop or manufacture P-AWS, since they've never done it fora V6 sedan before.
5. RLX has longer wheelbase.
6. Accord's high-end premium audio system cannot compete with the RLX's low-end standard system.
7. RLX's multiview camera is standard and superior to Accord's.
8. Who knows how much Agile Handling Assist costs to develop,or manufacture?
The new Accord is an impressive and attractive car. The devil's in the details, though.
2. I haven't driven the new Accord yet, but I do remember comparing the 2005 Accord to the 2005 RL. It was a big difference.
3. 2013 Accord V6 has 278 horsepower to the RLX's 310. Again, maybe the Accord should be compared to the TL instead.
4. We have no idea how much is costs Honda to develop or manufacture P-AWS, since they've never done it fora V6 sedan before.
5. RLX has longer wheelbase.
6. Accord's high-end premium audio system cannot compete with the RLX's low-end standard system.
7. RLX's multiview camera is standard and superior to Accord's.
8. Who knows how much Agile Handling Assist costs to develop,or manufacture?
The new Accord is an impressive and attractive car. The devil's in the details, though.
I wholeheartedly agree with your point in comparing the 2005 RL against the 2005 RL. There was a massive gap between the two cars in terms of build quality, materials, drive train, features, etc. The fact that the 2013 Accord can even be compared to the 2013 RLX shows how the Accord has stepped up its game big time while the RLX seems to be spinning its wheels.
And yes, the devil's in the details, as it always is when comparing something like an Accord against a higher end vehicle...It always has been. My problem is that the sum of those details do not seem to even come close to amounting to added costs.
04-17-2013, 04:57 PM
#120
Drifting
Acura is so afraid of dumping a bunch of money into R&D to produce a true European battling RWD based sedan platform and risking a massive failure. The fact of the matter is that they are failing with their current plan anyway, (I can almost guarantee you that future sales numbers of the RLX will show this car to be a failure). It's time for Acura to take the training wheels off, step up to the plate and swing for the fences.
I have yet to read a remotely favorable review on the new RLX. Every review I have read basically says, "Nice car, boring styling, not even close to its rivals, wait for the AWD model".
I have yet to read a remotely favorable review on the new RLX. Every review I have read basically says, "Nice car, boring styling, not even close to its rivals, wait for the AWD model".