The Hoth

I drove the 300C before. The car is solid man!

From the driving stand point, the 300C is awesome. It has power and great handling. Maybe the handling is not as good as the RL (AWD). But the money you save might help you to go to sleep at night a little easier.

I assume the new RL is gonna be at least over 40K. Anyone has the exact MSRP?

mav

The torque steer in the new TL's is ridiculous. I know I drove one for two weeks. The much hyped techno gizmos (voice and bluetooth) hardly worked. I like the TL, but hate the FWD and resulting torque steer and IMO, Acura/Honda over did it with the gizmos. Having voice recognition is definitely cool if it works, but when it doesn't its an annoying feature that should be done away with.

The new RL's exterior design is blah, the interior is nice though. The current RL can't complete in its class, and its successor will make a splash at best IMO. The BMW 5 Series, Audi A6, Mercedes Benz E Series, the new Infiniti M45 will kill it in sales.

tallguylehigh

The price for the car is still under some debate.

According to the Canadian pricing of the car, and the exchange rates and the inherent differences in prices, the range for the cost of this new RL will be somewhere between $48-53K.

As for the gadgets like headlamp washers and such and such, I am sure that they will be an option in the future- Honda/Acura is just giving the RL some time to grow. As for power increases, expect those to come in the form of IMA, not bigger engines.

Another thing about the TL- drove it, likes the TSX better, the torque steer was horrible. But, what is the RL is a vessel for Acura to test their AWD system and maybe implement it on the TL in the future? It is definately not out of the question, since thats what they did with one of their other great achievements VTEC, introduced in the NSX and trickled down to other models. I know the SH concept was introduced on the Prelude, but this is the first application of it in AWD format.

phoenix9999

I drove the MT TL and TSX and was very disappointed with the former. The TL felt heavy and ponderous, the torque steer took away any "fun" advantage it otherwise would have had over the previous TL, and the things I look for in a good sport sedan (the great steering feel, the awesome gearbox, the road feedback) weren't there.

The TSX on the other hand was an absolute hoot to drive (liked it more than the IS300 and the 3-series despite its FWD) and I'm so close to snapping one up as a grocery getter and winter beater. Honda truly nailed it with the TSX. It's a shame nobody knows about or is buying it, just like the Prelude it reminds me of.

As for SH-AWD, I still get misty-eyed when I think of the hard corners I took in my old Prelude SH. I truly believe that, with equivalent tires, the Prelude SH probably could take more speed into a turn than the S2000, thanks to ATTS. And that was a FWD application. I'm looking forward to hearing how a RWD/AWD application performs.

MaxGeek

I like the TSX aswell.

I wish they would create a 2.2L turbo AWD version of it. There was a concept/photoshop pic of it a while back. Looked sweet. It would be like a luxurious baby lancer.

VTEC Racer

I'm not clear on what your trying to say.

Acura IS aiming at the A6, E-Class, 5 Series and Lexus GS. The RL is not built to compete with the likes of the 7 Series, S Class, Lexus LS etc.... Acura has no car for that market.

However, its ignorant to say that Acura has missed the mark with the 2005 RL. Look at the standard equipment of the RL vs. that of the standard equipment of the cars above. Then, option out the competition equally to the RL (thats if the competition has the options even available for the car) and then compare the price. The RL is expected to cost less than $50,000. It's not all about RWD and V8. Apparently the consumer feels the same way making some Acura models some of the best selling cars. Honda has been making record sales every year. It surely isn't the RWD S2000 and NSX thats helping that out. Honda will do what is right to be on top while other manufactures slowly start to collapse like we see today.

Mercedes E320 4Matic, Audi A6, upcoming AWD GS300... Can you tell me how the RL won't be competing with these cars?

The only thing Acura will be missing with the 2005 RL is the extra money they could have been making from a higher MSRP that people would easily pay.

steve c

Again, cheap luxury is an oxy-moron. At this price point folks are generally well enough off to shrug off the 5 or 10 grand difference for what they feel (subjective of course) is the better car. The sales numbers demonstrate this; go look at the RL sales numbers and get back to me.

Not true at all. Acura to this point has not been capable of producing a car that directly competes with the class leaders and has used value to replace capability. Do you honestly think the S2000 would sell nearly as many units if priced in the 40,000-45,000 dollar range? Hell no. It gets enough flack for lack of torque as it is. The TL and TSX further this point; sold at the same price as the competition they would sell virtually none.

The above method has been the bread and butter of the Japanese strategy, first offer value, later offer capability. If they do half as well as they did with the subcompact and mid-size segment in the 80's and 90's we will all be driving Hondas and Toyotas in 10 years.

Ckcrigger

You can't look at the RL sales numbers for the last years to compare. The last generation RL has been outdated and a dog for a while. I don't think it'll be indicative of future sales.

The new RL is more capable than the previous generation.
Will have to wait for the test drive to see how the SH-AWD feels, though.

And "cheap luxury" is fantastic business. Lexus is doing quite well in sales. Comparably loaded, it's 5-10k cheaper than competition (more so in past years).

You'd be surprised at how many "rich people" got that way by not "wasting" money.

And of course the people who don't care will buy the "expensive" luxury anyway. So it capitalizes on a subset of the population who would rather put $10k towards their grandkid's college fund than on a car they'll just be driving 35mph in the suburbs.

If people were willing to shrug off 5-10k for what they "feel" was the better car... we'd see more E500s and AMGs in general. Some are, some aren't. It's a population and probably a bell-curve... Economics 101 flashbacks!!!

steve c

That is total crap. The current car competes in exactly the same class in the same manner as the new one will and the formula of offering 70 percent of the car for 80 percent of the price has thus far not panned out; I see no reason that it will work this time around techno gadgetry or not.

Lexus may not go head to head with the upper echelon of European big sedans, but they are a hell of a lot closer than anything Acura puts out. Read, V8, rear wheel drive.

That is an often used excuse meant to placate the middle income folks. I know plenty of folks who pull down 5K before lunch; economizing to the tune of 10-20 grand is insignifigant, grandchildren or not.

You are making an apples to oranges comparison there, the AMG's in particular are much more money than the RL, and offer a hell of a lot more performance. Despite the additional cost I would venture to guess they still sell more cars than Acura does the RL -- which furthers my point; cheap luxury is an oxy-moron, or if you prefer a small niche which I suspect is geared mostly towards the posuers who wish to portray a lifestyle they cannot afford.

Ckcrigger

Wow, you are a serious snob.

I'll refrain from this turning into another world against Steve C thread.

By the way, you're a hypocrite in the worst way:
You yourself wrote in a previous thread:
Steve C wrote:
"To be clear, I put zero value in the opinions of folks who are willing to go out of their way to invalidate actual statistics with silly excuses and use Internet and anecdotal evidence as fact. Saying you don't like a certain car for various reasons can be an opinion, and as such it is valid. Making up data to support your opinion crosses the line."

You "knowing plenty of folks" is just as bad as the sisters-brothers-barber BS that you rant so vehemently against.
It IS a fact that there a lot more people in the nation who $5-10k does have influence.
It doesn't matter if your own microcosm doesn't reflect the american economy as a whole.
Read your comments again and see if you shouldn't, by your own self-admission, put ZERO VALUE in your own opinions...

And I'm happy that you know "plenty of folks," but I can tell you I know some older rich "folk" who are stingy as hell. Certain ethnic and cultural groups emphasize frugality over such lavish self-indulgence.