steve c

It's not snobbery, just reality as I see it. Snobbery would be saying that *I* pull that much money down before lunch then poo pooing your vehicles while bragging about all of mine and maybe throwing in a few pictures of my houses. Hypothetical of course. I might be a snob, but I have yet to meet one who drives an 86 Mr2 with 200,000 miles and loves it.

This won't turn into a world versus anyone thread. Until your post we had all managed to keep the conversation at an adult level without attacking other people. Why not keep it at that level? There are some interesting responses in this thread; don't get all bent out of whack if we don't share the same views.

If you read my statement you will realize that I say opinions are great, trying to sell your opinion as fact by using false evidence or outright lies is not. I do not see the hypocrisy as I am conveying personal opinions and leaving it at that.

LUV2REV

What are you trying to get at ? First, you lay blasphemy on the new RL for being AWD and not RWD, yet you drive an AWD 911, where RWD 911's are readily available. You go on about the TSX and TL too, two very good cars that are selling exceptionally well, but inferior due to their FWD layout. Then you lay your socioeconomic acrimony on the line. GET REAL AND GET A LIFE YOU HYPOCRITE

LUV2REV

The TSX is selling very well. Unfortunately, there are some around here who simply denounce it because of it's FWD layout, what a shame. With bigger wheels/better tires, aftermarket suspension/ bigger rear swaybar, you have a car that will easily compete or beat many of the E46 3 series car's in the handling department. Look how competitive the RealTime TSX's are in the challenge series. Now let Steve C. chime in with his usual rhetoric.

MaxGeek

I understand your point of view on the TSX and it is a good car, but you really can't compare modified cars and race cars to stock production cars.

steve c

That is an invalid comparison. The Turbo 911 is AWD, but inherently a rear wheel drive car (95 percent of power under normal conditions goes to the rear end). The RL is inherently a front wheel drive car with some power to the rear wheels. What

rai

Steve you're wrong about this. The 04 RL was an albatross much in the way the NSX is. RL owners don't flame me, but it's true. The 04 RL is a 225-hp 3900 lb fwd car. That's not the case any more.

The new RL is a 300 hp car. That may not sound like a lot, but it's probably good for sub-7.0 sec 0-60 (the old car was 8.4 sec). The LS430 has less than 300 hp. Wasn't too long ago that (some) V12s didn't have 300 hp.

The new car is AWD and not just regular fwd/awd set up, but a brand new awd system that can provide as much as 70% of the power to the rearI don't know the interior room, but the weight puts it right with the LS430, if it's as big and as luxurious as the LS (I don't know). I'd bet in a race the RL would be able to keep up with the Lexus V8 (that's probably an understatment).

There are other V8s that out muscle the RL, but except for the 300C they all cost a bit or a lot more. All the I6 and V6 cars in this category do not produce 300 hp.

So if you could please tell me why you think the new RL is in the same class with the same manner (as the old RL)? As I've shown the RL was FWD with the weakest V6 now it's AWD with the strongest V6. Seems like night and day to me.

LUV2REV

Fair statement. Here is an apple to apple comparison. The 320i (2.2L I-6) base is nearly the same price as the TSX here in Canada (320i is slightly more expensive). The TSX dominates this car in all regards. The TSX better compares stock for stock with the 325i which starts nearly $9000 higher. Yes, the edge goes to the 325i, but then again look at the price discrepancy, you are in TL territory with a base 325i. For that $9K I can make my TSX do circles around the 325i.

LUV2REV

[QUOTE=rai,Sep 4 2004, 11:26 AM] Steve you're wrong about this.

LUV2REV

So, the S2000 would never sell for $40-$45K because it already takes flack for it's lack of torque ?? I didn't realize torque figures equate into the inherent value of a car. The funny thing is the S2000 undercuts most of it's competition by many, many thousands of dollars and still tears them apart on the playing field. So price the S2000 at your $40-$45K and it still beats up most of it's roadster competition. The bottom line is the Acura brand offers near or better performance (not the NSX) than it's more expensive competition at a much better price, often with better quality and reliability. The TSX and TL undercut their competition in price and in alot of cases outperform them. Your last sentence makes no sense at all. I see value and capability, shun your rose colored glasses.

phoenix9999

Oh please, you've been combative since the beginning. Despite not being a regular poster even I know about you. Sheesh.

The RL didn't compete well against the E320, 525i, A6 non-4.2, GS300 and the rest because it was an out-and-out mispositioned car. It had nothing to do with the Acura Way or its alleged value quotient, and everything to do with FWD in a RWD/AWD class, low horsepower in a high horsepower class, and not a sporty bone in its chassis in a class defined by sport sedans.

The RL in design was a direct competitor to the Lincoln Park Avenue, Toyota Avalon and Lexus ES300, and in pricing a direct competitor to the E320 and 525i. That's a bad formula. It's a mistake.

The NEW RL is a different beast. I hope we all can agree on that. First, it appears to be a bona fide sport sedan. The truth will be seen when the first reviews hit the press. We do not have to wait long to find out for sure. If the indications are correct, however, the RL is a well-handling, precise sport sedan with all the suspension, engine, transmission, chassis and aerodynamic trappings of its sport sedan competition. It eschews the "luxury cruiser" design of the outgoing RL in favor of something quite different. In my book the new RL therefore is an entirely different car. And, as an aside, the fact that they are positioning it as a sport sedan opens the door for Honda to plan out a bona fide luxury sedan that the last RL tried (and failed) to be. I see the strategy as akin to what Lexus did in splitting up the IS and ES. It's a good strategy.

The new RL unlike the old does not seem to have an identity problem. As such I expect it to be pretty competitive with its current playing field. If you prefer a 525i for the same price, by all means, go for it. I won't be at the BMW dealership trying to stop you. I however see the RL being competitive with the mid-range Euro sedans in a way that the old one never even tried to be. That makes all of us winners... and you should be happy too, it gives you yet another thing to sneer at and argue about until the cows home.