"ORLANDO, Fla. -- When Acura redesigned its flagship RL in 2004, it loaded on the goodies: all-wheel drive, navigation system, 10-speaker stereo and radar that warns drivers of an impending crash.

It has a price tag to match: $49,915 with shipping, about $6,000 more than the previous-generation RL.

Oops.

Now Acura has concluded that its slow-selling flagship needs help.

The division is considering a lower-content version of the car, some dealers say. Sales chief Dick Colliver told Automotive News that the RL's content will change next year but gave no details. He acknowledged that the RL "hasn't performed to expectations."....................."

Read the whole thing in the link<ul><li><a href="http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060221/FREE/60221002/1024/LATESTNEWS">klik</a></li></ul>

Huh?

McGrath said the dealer council has recommended a model with less content. "It only comes one way: loaded," he said. "We need something in the low to mid-40s."

They already have that - it's called the TL, sans AWD of course. IMHO, the problem is that the TL is taking sales away from the RL. How about making it bigger and more similar to the Lexus LS?

brand is not mature enough to sell such a high-priced car, which is sold as Honda Legend in Europe and some parts of Asia. It sort of reminds of the VW Phaeton.

I've been very happy with my 02 TL Type S. Once I modified the suspension, it handled better than my B5 A4 with sport package.

Yes torque steer is annoying but somethign I can deal with - the power puts enough of a smile on my face that I accept the annoyance.

So here I am, ready to spend more on my next car, wanting AWD and more luxury features.

Enter the RL. SHAWD, arguably the best performance AWD system on the market, fully loaded at a decent price. But...


1. Too close in size to the TL, and actually SMALLER than my 02 Type S.

2. Styling is bland, if they kept it anywhere close to the TSX and current TL I would have jumped all over it.

3. Performance doesn't match the 3.5l 300hp sticker. Yes it's significantly faster than an A6 3.2 but slower than my Type S. I would have hoped that the increase in displacement would have been enough to overcome the AWD - is it gearing?

My solution for Acura :

1. Make the TL slightly smaller than a 5 series, make the RL slightly bigger - this will seperate the two.

2. Make V8 an option. Even though most won't buy it, it raises the profile of the car.

3. Get some design help, actually, just morph the TL into something a bit more refined - toss the design that looks like an Accord with RSX headlights.

I WANT to like the RL, but can't bring myself to do it; despite being the best in class to drive in my experience.

- Honda/Acura's insistance on stiffing the front seat passenger in seat adjustability (the wife's only absolute veto condition), and

- it's just a techno Accord. With the 2nd Gen Legend and old RL, you got a bigger chassis and body that was unique - not some rebadged Honda everyone else was driving. That's my major problem with the new RL.

Bob

V6 just don't have the punch, no matter how they tune it. Power out put looks good for an V6, but torque sucks. Then, the real end just simplely UGLY!!!!, interior is not that impresive either. At the end, I went in with all the expectations, and left with all the disappointment. I agree most of comments here, it is just not an comparesion to Audi.

the interior dimensions and trunk room suck too compared to the out-going model. also, Acura built up a lot hype before the release, and now you don't hear anything about it. my dad considered the car when it first came and the dealer was actually gonna make a hell of a deal on it...he ended up dropping $15k more on an E500. no one wants to drop $50k on what looks like a big Accord.

totally different car, makes a stock tls look like a camry

Design is in the eye of the beholder, and can't be discussed any better than art. Some like Mona Lisa, I not.
I don't race my cars, but I still think that it goes through curves way better than my C5 A6, faster acceleration, and NO hesitation from the gearbox/turbo. And yes it is faster. As anyone who took the effort to test drive one can tell you, the quiteness is deceptive, like my old Lexus GS 400, which also was faster than the C5. On the top of that it renders &gt;24 MPG going to and from work, versus the &lt;20 MPG I got from my C6. I should also note, that I got it for $44K and felt it to be a better deal than the 3.2 A6.

So why do I still monitor this site, well I have owned 4 rings for more years than many of you are old!? and I'm still fasinated by the technolgy they put out. But I was hoping to get a 4.2 with FSI and the 40/60 split in an A6, and I'm kind of waiting to find out when such a beast will surface. I think that the S6 will be a bit beyond my willingness to spend $ on a car.

Enjoy your cars as I do mine

they should take some cues from the TL

springs, Comptech sway bars, 17" snow tires for the winter. My wife's '05 3.2 A6 (17" tires, no sports suspension, no S-line) just eat my dust on the twisting roads to Whistler. Only in the rain or in the snow will I lose to her hands down.

Buying a luxury German car is more about status then specification or performance comparison. Sure you can get an Acura RL or Infiniti M that performs better than a BMW/MB/Audi but most people won't give you the "recognition". Some people like spending the money to get the "status" and some folks like to be more practical and get their money's worth.....just my 2 cent

They'll use adjectives like "german engineering" or "fit and finish" or the likes

found in larger Japanese luxury sedans since the original Legend.

For all that it's efficient and reliable, driving in a Toyota Camry for more than 5 minutes makes me want to slit my wrists our of sheer boredom. Not the same with Passat 2.0T.

For the folks who never feel or notice that difference, you're probably lucky because you'll save a lot of money ;-) Different strokes for different folks.

the 3.2 A6. I was cross-shopping the A6 with the RL (and the M35 just for curiosity). It ended up even with the big-item options, the A6 is still cheaper than the RL. If the RL was $10K cdn cheaper, I would have bought it without a doubt.

There's very little difference in the feel, drive, etc. of an A6 and an Rl IMO.

I think it's Euro placebo effect for some.

With a Camry I agree, but not so with an Accord vs Passat.

Acura is 69k fully loaded w Nav

A6 3.2 is 68k with just a sunroof, xenons and cold weather package and NO nav

one of the "lucky" ones ;-)

on the track any day let alone a twisty road, yet the cozy Recaros hug you tight, the a/c blows cold and the stereo thumps loud. And then there are other cars that eat the Alfa for lunch.....

It's apples and oranges when you mod a car;-)

pretty much like like the A4 which looks like the A 6 etc ...I.e. no real differentiation for your money here either. You just happen to like the AUDI design better, which is fine.

I would like to have an A6 which isn't mistaken for an A4, and I have done that often when seeing one in the rear view mirror, after the new fishmouth version.

I for one think that one of the prettiest car designs are that of the ALFAs. I Have held that opinion for the last 30 years. Never owned one as they have always had this really bad reputation of poor reliability (talking to quite some ALFA owners over time it seems not only to be reputation. The new Accord has "stolen" some of the design elements of the ALFA 15x, and is as such one of the nicer designs out of Honda IMHO.

An earlier remark dealt with prestige of owning a German car. That probably still hold true for the MB and the BMW, but AUDI hasn't got there yet. It' not quite as bad as being a VW, evne though it is, and has been for a long time, and it's acceptance is growing.

I never bought a car for bragging rights, but rather to be satisfactory to myself, irregardless of what anybody else thinks thereof. Proof in the pudding is my Citroen DS 21 and my 2 RO 80s which I (still) love more than any modern AUDI.

For what it's worth

here of Honda trying to sell a car that looks too much like the mass market sedan from their lower line brand. Honda should have made the RL more distinctive like some of their lower models.

As for Alfas being unreliable, that is a total crock brought about by owners who are not proactive in their maintenance of their cars. I have 5 V6 Alfas, all of which have gone beyond 100K miles, and my reliable daily driver up until recently has 257K miles, including trips to the Yukon and race tracks.

Ironically I looked into purchasing Citroen SM a few years back, but owners told me it wasn't a car for daily use. The RO 80 was always a great design, even if the unreliable rotory engine doomed NSU.

Why doesn't the RL makes it an option, rather than shove it down the throat of car buyers who don't need it but having them pay for it ?! It would have been a saving of 2-3K off the MSRP. By the way, I don't need sunroof either, but the damn A6 package made me pay for it.

A lesser-equipped, and therefore cheaper (~5K less) and lighter RL would have captured a lot more buyers, including myself.

can be modded to handle better. It's just that I have a 3.2 A6 sitting in my garage I can use for baseline comparison. The TL-S is never intended to be a track car, the Integra Type-R and the RSX-S are.

How do you figure $10k cheaper?

It's $500 cheaper.

But I agree, Nav is stupid. But no-Nav would only save you a couple thousand bucks.

sport suspensions go and a totally stock non-sport suspension car is not really a comparison.

If a car is everything you need but the only issue is that a company chooses to bring it to market with a soft suspension, it's a cheap upgrade to add springs and sways.

Most german companies offer a sports package. Think of aftermarket springs and sways as a way to compare apples to apples.

additional options on his/her 3.2 A6. In my case, $2K cheaper (before price negotiation) is the difference I had with the 3.2 A6 loaded with options that I voluntary picked (except for the high-power audio and moon-roof).

I know, the RL may be cheaper when you equipp the 3.2 A6 to the same level of features. But most people buy the entry level 3.2 version with little options because of the much lower price. They don't usually arm the 3.2 A6 to the teeth with factory options. Otherwise they would go for the much better-performed 4.2 A6. But for the RL, you have a choice of an expensive armed-to-the-teeth car or no car at all.

sport suspension and factory 18" rims, or with the S-line performance package. Since Acura didn't have factory suspension upgrade for the TL-S, the only way to go is aftermarket parts to be fair.

However, the '04+ TL can be ordered with FPP (Factory Performance Package or A-spec Package) which consists of shock/spring upgrade, 18" light-weight rims, and other aero pieces.

Now we're comparing apple to apple.

it's styling is boring. Especially in the rear, which slopes off and has no substance (weak).

But I'd take the reliability and better ergonomics of the Accord over the "trunk closing thud" of the Passat.

And both of them are basically buick's compared to a sports sedan.

I'd bet the handling would be very comparable.