Jlacy

I need to buy a comfortable RELIABLE car. I'm 66 years old, live on Social Security money and can't afford crazy BMW repair bills. I live in south florida and drive under 12,000 miles a year.
Ride quality is very important. I don't want a still sports suspension. I want the smoothest and quietest ride possible.

Which year and model has the best ride and is there one or two years that are more reliable than others?

What are the most common items that need repair on these 3rd gen models before and after 100,000 miles?

I'm pretty sure I'm going to buy a TL this week. Please help steer me in the right direction.

Thanks!
Joe

justnspace

iTrader: (1)

this car is a sports sedan!!!! this car has a stiff suspension!!!
no matter how you slice it, it will be stiff.
on top of that; you are looking at older cars...it's at least 14 years old!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! any car with over 100k miles will need a refresh of the suspension.
2nd of all; if you arent prepared to change out the automatic transmission; if and when it goes bad, choose another car!

what you have told us; you'd better off suited in a newer toyota; with a soft plush ride that is very inexpensive to own. like a corolla or a camry or even an avalon


the TL will need an auto transmission if and when it goes.
TL's have timing belts that need to be serviced at 105k miles. that service, if done at the dealer can cost up to $1200

GhostTL09

iTrader: (1)

If you can find a clean one owner tl with less than 65000 miles you'll probably get the right quality that you're looking for however you will not get that ride quality in TL-Type-S . I would only look at a 2007 or 2008

truonghthe

the best ride quality in the TL is the year 07-08 Base model as the suspension tuned toward ride comfort. The only big and biggest ticket item for these years are 105k services cost around $1200 (dealer price), LCA bushing busted cost $550 (dealer), HFL could be fix for $270 or you can simply just unplug it.

losiglow

iTrader: (1)

Justn is largely on point here. It's a sports sedan, not a floaty Toyota Avalon or something like that. However, I have a co-worker who is in his late 50's and qualifies for a handicap placard due to various hip and knee surgeries he's had. He has an '07 Base TL and loves it despite the sensitively of his joints. Like GhostTL and truonghthe said, I'd concentrate on 2007 and 2008 if I were you. Simply due to the increased reliability of the transmission. You might consider an RL, although I'm not an expert on items that could go wrong with them.

stevemk07

Why not a Camry in good condition?

Jackass

Lots of good points being made here....unknown of your physical state of condition, but I know my parents (in their late 60's) despise riding in my car since it is quite difficult for them to get in and out of it. My mother has multiple bad joints and with the slick seats and low ride height, she is for sure not a fan. As for ride quality? I guess it really comes down to what you are used to and what your expectations are. I have an '05 M/T and I think the ride quality is pretty nice. But I am in my early 40s and my previous cars were lowered entry level cars that rode like chuck wagons....so pretty much anything had a better ride than those did.

- stick to 2007 and 2008 and there aren't that many major issues
- primary maintenance item will be 105k service (timing belt) and preventive on the transmission

Otherwise they are used cars and can have a variety of issues depending on how well they were maintained over the years. Lots of threads already on here that cover more of the more minor issues that crop up from time to time.

1black_seven

iTrader: (2)

If it's not an 2007-2008 Base/automatic, you're gonna have a bad time.

horseshoez

iTrader: (2)

From reading this thread it seems not all us sixty-somethings have similar needs, wants, desires, and tastes; I have a 2006 TL 6MT and love the ride and might like it even a bit stiffer (except for when driving down Washington Street in Hoboken, NJ, but that's another story).

Long story short, @Jlacy, you've been given good information assuming you want a car with an Automatic transmission; stick to the 2007 or 2008 base (i.e. non-Type-S) models. A good solid transmission and a softer ride than either the 6MT models or the Type-S models.

truonghthe

@Jlacy you can look into the RL too as they ride almost lexus like however. The OEM 17" tires on RL will give you hell when they need to be replaced since only two car out there using that tire size. I have a TL Type S and Base with nav and a RL. The RL is nice on the inside and you can tell once you sat in the interior.

Chad05TL

The OEM base model is not stiff at all. And they ride great. Just make sure the car does not look like it is riding real low. If it is, then it has been modified. And modified suspensions will all ride rough. The TL does not tolerate lowering the vehicle much without riding stiff. I think it has to do with excessive camber and the type of spring that most people use to lower it with. So, just stick with one that has not been modified, and it will be great. But that being said, when they get old, bushings get harder, and there are lots of joints on these wishbone suspensions. And they get loose after a while. even the bearing on the TL is not a module replacement. My camaro had a modulized wheel bearing. Meaning, you didnt have to press the bearings out of the knuckle. In general, I like th GM suspensions on their sport cars much better than the Honda accords and TLs and civics. I wont bother mentioning 2 ball joints on the front and inner and outter tie rods and swaybar links haha Its a rattle trap.

hadokenuh

I'd buy a newer Avalon if I were you.

LoveMyTL-S

Some good advice in here. I have to agree, if your heart is set on an Acura TL, go with the 07/08 base model. They will have the softest ride. I have the TL-S and it has a solid but stiff feel. But after having two of these for the past 10 years I'm used to the ride.
Test drive the one you are interested in and feel for yourself the comfort and ride. If you like it, go for it!! If not, "move along, this is not the car your looking for".
Good luck in your search and let us know what you went with. Cheers.

Tamale

I wouldn't be classified as an "enthusiast", just a car owner who has been happy with their car for 13+ years. This thread seems like a real downer about the Gen3 TL and especially the 2004-2006 models. As I said, I'm not an "enthusiast" and don't know all the nuances between a 2004-2006 vs 2007-2006. However, based on my experiences and those of the people I know who have the cars, I think this thread is doing an injustice to the model.

My car is a 2004 TL with 152,000 miles on it and is currently for sale. I think the ideal new owner for it is someone exactly like yourself - someone who wants a safe, reliable, decent looking older car for a reasonable price. My 152,000 is all urban SoCal driving. I have always properly maintained it (majority dealer maintained). I've never had the check engine light come on. Nor has it ever failed smog. And unless you consider an alternator going out, I've never had a "mechanical problem" (to me that's something to be expected and happens after about 11 years...). If it's continued to be maintained, it will go another 100,000 or more.

What are the most common things that "go out"? mine has needed things that go out on any car over time like belts and such. Plus, the everyday things like brakes and tires, etc. Cosmetically = almost all the 2004-2006 have torn leather seats mine included, cracked dashboards (mine has been replaced), door handle caps fall off (mine are replaced) and the hood shocks wear out (which thanks to a great youtube video I fixed in 5 minutes & $30 for parts on Amazon)

Regarding the ride - it's not a stiff ride like a lot of European cars, but it's far from a boat. You feel the road when you drive it.

Wondering why I'm getting selling my car? 1) the blue tooth phone never worked great. On the car side it always sounded fine, on the other listeners side it doesn't. That was ok in 2006 when car phones were new and exciting, not so good in 2018. And when I'm in my car a lot and need to have work related conversations, it's just no longer acceptable. 2. Like I said, I'm in SoCal - I live in an area with the highest sales tax on earth (10.25%) with the removal of the sale tax deduction beginning 1/1/2018 - I had to take advantage of it before it ended.

WDPanda

for a plush ride I would consider the RL as well.
also a Lexus ES or GS

horseshoez

iTrader: (2)

Keeping this thread in context, the single reason why most folks here have steered Jlacy toward a 2007 or 2008 model versus the first three model years is because of the "when not if" prospect of a transmission failure. The final two years of the 3G TL featured an upgraded transmission which is no where near as prone to failure, and given Jlacy specifically stated the need for reliability, that pretty much rules out the older cars.

In the case of your car, if your transmission hasn't failed yet, it will, plain and simple.

Tamale

I still think it's a disservice to discredit the 2004-2006.
"In the case of your car, if your transmission hasn't failed yet, it will, plain and simple." well, sure. Keep a car long enough and the transmission will at some point fail. A car that is 3 or 4 years newer should have statistically less chance of mechanical problems. But it's a trade off, in my neck of the woods 07-08, are on listing for $2500-$3000 more (50% higher) than mine with not a significant amount of fewer miles.

Out of the people I know who are driving cars that are 10-15 years old, my car is both mechanically & cosmetically better than theirs. Recently, two different friends needed engine replacement on cars (other makes) that aren't even 10 years old. If whomever buys my car doesn't maintain it and drives it harder than i do, they are going to have problems. Continue to maintain it and it will continue to be reliable.

Mr Jlacy doesn't mention how price plays into it. If price isn't the ultimate issue, go with the newer car. If price is a main factor, the 2004 - 2006 can be a reliable car, if it's been maintained.

horseshoez

iTrader: (2)

You are entirely missing the point; the incidence of transmission failures in the 2004-2006 cars with automatic transmissions is way beyond the curve, I mean, when a run of the mill and poorly regarded Dodge minivan transmission is considered way more reliable than the early TL transmissions, then you know there is a problem.

Acura TL Builder

Acura RL for the soft kush riding preference.

Joecop67

You guys keep posting. The op posted once 9 days ago. Lol.
He probably bought a car already.

justnspace

iTrader: (1)

I think it's super important to at least know these issues exists.
The worst part about buying a used car is throwing additional monies at it to fix a major component.

If you are prepared for this, it's not that big of a deal.
If unprepared, get ready to have your world turned upside down

Alexns05

Where are you getting your statistics that says the failures of 04-06 transmissions are "way beyond the curve"? That sounds pretty made up. I think a lot of the fear came from the 2G TLs having the transmission issues, especially the 2003. Then with the first few years of the new generation starting in 2004 people have been hyper-sensitive to the issues. I've been on these message boards since 2012 when I bought my '04 TL and it seems like the people saying the transmission are horrible are people who have been on here longer than me and just go based on the plethora of threads created about bad transmissions. But if you've ever taken a statistics class you'll know that when you survey people, the most likely people to reply are people who have had either a horrible experience or excellent experience. So that's why there are so many people that don't even frequent the message board but just come here to post their bad transmission stories.

And it doesn't make sense to say the transmission failure is "when not if" because that is true for every transmission in every car ever made, as well as any mechanical component for that reason. With that being said, my '04 TL is going strong at 157,000 miles. No transmission issues thus far. You can look at websites like CarComplains.com that keeps statistics on reported issues. Sorry but there is no year of the TL that is ranked worse than a Dodge minivan. You can also look at consumer reports because they take more extensive data from car repairs around the country. The 3G TL get good ratings in their report too. As with any car having 150k+ miles on it, you're taking a gamble with the transmission. But let's stop with the transmission horror stories.

horseshoez

iTrader: (2)

Clearly some cars manage a long run before the failure, hell, even a few of the previously mentioned minivan transmissions manage 200,000+ miles before the inevitable strikes; same thing applies to your transmission. Sorry, I'm just the messenger here; search around this site and you'll find literally hundreds of examples of the 2004-2006 automatic failing, and unless I'm mistaken the failure rate is pretty much bang on that of the 2G transmission.

Alexns05

But that's what I'm saying, you can't go based off of posts on a message board because out of 227,500 people (actual production numbers) who have an 04-06 TL you aren't going to have the let's say 190,000 people with no transmission issues to come on here and post "hey my transmission is fine". But when something major like a transmission issue happens, people have a way higher chance of researching the issue, seeing if anyone else had similar issues, and complaining about the problem. So even if 100 people posted threads on here about bad transmission that's still about .05% (no not 5%, .05%) of all Acura TL owners through those years. Those aren't the actual numbers but I'm just trying to explain how statistics work and why the issue seems inflated.

I will add that there was a recall for early '04 models. I believe the issue with the 2G TLs they discovered during the first couple months of the '04 TL productions. So '04 cars that were made before a cutoff date had a recall and if they were under 15,000 miles they just installed the transmission cooler, if more they would take it apart and expect for damaged parts. And you can check if the car was under that recall. But I'm guessing maybe a majority of the "early" transmission failures of '04 were cars that had this recall? Also now that I think of it, the 2007 and 2008 production numbers were less than 50% of the 04-06 numbers. So even that alone would mean you should see less than half the amount of transmission issues in 07-08 models. That doesn't even take into account the fact that these cars are 1-4 years newer than the 04-06 models and would obviously have less issues (all else being equal) based solely on that fact.

Just look at any message board for any car and all you will hear about is transmissions. I mean just Google "[name of car model] and transmission" and you'll find unlimited numbers of transmission complaints.

horseshoez

iTrader: (2)

I'm not sure what you're driving at; the 2004-2006 3G TL is widely known to have a transmission as fragile as glass. Like it or don't, believe it or not, that's the fact of the situation.

Jackass

I've been on these forums since 2008 and there were people with '04-06 TLs already talking about failed transmissions. I agree with you that the stats may get blown out of proportion a bit...but the transmission for sure isn't quite up to the same level of reliability as the rest of the vehicle.

Alexns05

I'm driving at the logic of something not being a "fact" until it is proven. You're using multiple posts about transmission issues as evidence that the transmissions are like glass. But you have to take into account numbers such as units produced, type of "transmission failure", etc. You can't just make up your own conclusions. For example, there were over 210,000 units produced from 04-06 and less than 100,000 produced for 07-08. If there are exactly twice as many failures in the 04-06 as there are in the 07-08, which models has a higher percentage of failures? If you answered 04-06 you're wrong. You could have 100,000 failures in the 04-06 and 50,000 failures in the 07-08 and that means less than 50% of the 04-06 have failures and more than 50% of the 07-08 models have failures. I'm not trying to sound like an arsehole but I can't be the only person that understand basic math. I understand you may THINK there are more transmission issues and there sure enough may be. But what is your proof?! Posts in a message board don't count.

Let's not steer somebody away from buying a good car considering that even with the alleged high incidence of transmission failures it still probably has a better transmission than most domestic vehicles and maybe even a majority of foreign vehicles.

Jackass

I actually could care less about the numbers....I bought a MT not an auto so chasing the exact numbers are irrelevant to me. :P

You have a valid point...but these are user forums full of all kinds of non-factual information. Better transmission than most domestic? Hoping you have numbers and facts to back that up as well.

For what its worth, my wife's 2002 Grand Am has 186k miles on it when we traded it in a few years back. We had never changed the fluid in it ever over the 9 years and 150k miles we drove it. That is a single example, but I knew lots and lots of people with late 90s and early 2000 GM FWD vehicles that generally had solid power trains...the rest of the car may rattle itself apart...but the engines and transmissions out of the J and N body vehicles were generally quite reliable.

champaned_out

iTrader: (2)

Honda's have had shit auto transmissions across different models... 98-02 Accords BOTH 4 bangers and V6 had shit trannys, 99-02 TL/CL non Type-S and Type-S autos all had glass transmissions... and now the 04-06 TLs

i own a 05 Auto TL with approx 148k on it and believe it or not, I had to replace the engine at 142k yet my transmission feels rock fucking solid.. so now i have a 70k engine with a 148k+ transmission and i have yet to even feel a gear slip or grind.. it still bangs through gears quick and smooth for a transmission from that era.. and believe me ive own a 2001 Accord that needed a rebuilt transmission so i know ALL the signs of a failing transmission no matter how small the signs are and my TL has yet to display a single problem as of right now

I dont know what to say.. it really can be a gamble i guess considering how many people have had problems with it BUT you need to know it is not nearly as many as you think.. its not like you're looking at a 50/50 shot when purchasing a 3rd gen

Tamale

Dude, I'm not missing your point. You are concerned that there is a transmission issue with this model. I got it and you think I'm being short-sighted to not recognize it. I don't think someone buying a car should look at one aspect, instead of the entire vehicle. As well as, if a car that made it to 150K miles and didn't have a problem, it is no more likely to need a new transmission than any other car since most cars need transmission between 150K-200K. Additionally, you compared the 2004 TL to a 2004 Dodge minivan (Caravan). One is known to hold is value, remain reliable, and predominately continues to look good, whereas a 14 year old minivan with 150K miles on it is likely to be a jalopy. Besides that fact that this model of minivans you referenced has a horrible track record for transmissions.

When I google Acura TL Gen 3 transmission problem = the 2008 is at the top of the list and 2004 is in 3rd place (out of 5). I also asked the dealer service dept "do you have problems with the '04 transmission"? "as long as the fluid is replaced as scheduled with a quality synthetic transmission fluid we don't see a lot of problems." Alexns05 makes a great point that individuals who have cars with transmission problems, then post about it aren't a very representative group. Just like I will concede that a dealer saying he doesn't see a lot of cars with problems is not especially representative since most cars at this point are no longer dealer maintained.

Joecop67

To be fair, an Acura dealership isn't going to say "yes, the Acuras we sell have transmission problem."
That's like going to a restaurant and asking the chef if the food is bad.

dub-nub

I recently purchased a 2007 acura TL and within the first 10 minutes of searching i was able to determine that the transmissions are poor. The car had a blown engine and a recently replaced automatic transmission, which is why i took the purchase.

carcomplaints.com is a great source to know where the problems are in these cars.

I have a thread on here with my journey that i took to replace the engine with a new/used engine and i got it running yesterday.

WDPanda

Having been on many forums, this is a true statement. Common problems trend in forums and the 3g auto is one of them. Like it or hate it, it is what it is. And to think, they're trying to nix the manuals...

horseshoez

iTrader: (2)

I'm not going to argue with you any longer; you're more than welcome to live in your fantasy world.

b15

04TTTL

New 2004 Acura TL Aspec owner, amazingly smooth and no regrets. I recently took my TL to the mechanic and had to resurface front rotars(squeeling breaks), changed out my Driver side drive shaft, and changed out my rear breaks total cost was $290.00. Car runs like new now.

GhostTL09

iTrader: (1)

Meanwhile OP bought a 2005 Ford 500

horseshoez

iTrader: (2)

FYI, here is a post from today reporting yet another failure:

• https://acurazine.com/forums/third-g.../#post16171353

truonghthe

Joecop67