Last post on Jan 07, 2012 at 5:27 PM
You are in the Acura TL
What is this discussion about?
Acura TL, Sedan
Jul 13, 2003 (6:10 am)
Was the 95-98 TL interior that much better than the 99-03 TL interior? I remember in 1998 the 98 TL was priced at 33K and the 99 TL was priced at 29K when it came out. Could have been some cost cutting in there to lower the buying price of the 99 TL. My thinking was Acura was slipping while Lexus was streaking back in 1998. They had to do something and lower the TL's price to sway buyers away from the Lexus ES 300. Lets see a base 99 Es 300 went for 33K while a 99 TL went for 29K. Nice strartegy by Honda. I would no way buy a Lexus because I don't care for their styling mostly with a few exceptions but Lexus was just on a hot streak in 1998.
#2506 of 9045 02 TL interior vs 02 Accord interior
Jul 13, 2003 (6:20 am)
In July 0f 2001 I looked at an 01 Accord Coupe and a 01 CL(Base model.) I bought the CL because I thought the interior was a little bit better and the exterior styling of the CL appealed more to me. It seemed like the interior was layed out a little bit better in the Acura than in the Honda.
Jul 13, 2003 (9:45 am)
well, as I've said, I have a 96 TL and a 2003 TL Type S and I don't see the similarities in the interiors......remember the cars are basically the same size, and if you check the specs, the older TLs 96-98 have more room inside, however, when inside my '03.....it seems much more roomier. I agree, headroom in both models is an issue. Someone mentioned comparing the interior of the TL to that of the new Lexus ES 300.......I've seen the lexus on TV, yep, it looks nice, but have you seen how they completely ruined the design of that car?! Acura, hands down the winner there, and much less $....more power, and it does look different than it's sister, the Accord......the ES 300 does not look any different than it's sister the Camry, oh wait, yep, the lights are different..haha!
Jul 13, 2003 (9:48 am)
On another note.....one of the main reasons the TL became cheaper in 99 was because the assembly took place in the US. The 96-98 models were assembled in Japan. Also, the no options, other than the nav, help reduce production costs. RE: wood trim, yep, I'd rather have it real wood, I went for the diamond white pearl TL Type S as it came in beige leather and the much better wood color than the black leather TLs offer. One of the reasons, I believe, the TL is not real wood is because they only put that in the flagship the RL to help differentiate the car. The RL for 2005 will likely be the nicest luxury car on the road for around $50,000........much nicer than the Lexus LS 400 or 430, whatever that over-priced toyota is!
Jul 13, 2003 (10:00 am)
The RL is going to have battle the 05 BMW 5 Series, 05 Cadillac Seville STS, Lexus LS430 and whatever Mercedes offers in that price range. Its going to be exciting though because Cadillac, Acura, and BMW will put their $50,000 offerings at basically the same time! Even though I like Acura alot I think BMW has everybody covered in this class.
#2510 of 9045 Re Carguy's post #160 re RL...
Jul 13, 2003 (3:27 pm)
not sure that you are on the right board, but as someone who has anguished a bit over the the RL, my sense is that they have a HUGE mountain to climb when the "new" RL finally hits the streets (whenever that is). I think Honda has blown it big time with so little info on this car. The existing RL, while a nice car, is NOT selling vs. the competition. If Honda wants to compete with a V6 only, then the rest of the car: interior, styling, features, etc, had better be bullet-proof. It has been incomprehensible to me that Honda did not put the VTEC V6 and a five speed auto transmission in this car two years ago. GAWD! if they were going to let it go this long without serious make over, why didn't they at least take existing Honda offerings off the shelf to improve what they were trying to sell??? I wanted to buy an RL several years ago and kept waiting for the "02" which was supposed to be such a big change. Obviously did not happen, so I gave up and bought a BMW. Great car, but I remain pissed at Honda for not giving me a chance to make some other decision. They have strung out their RL potential buyers far beyond reason....
Jul 13, 2003 (11:20 pm)
I suspect the RL replacement was one of the few cars Honda actually had to muddle over as far as it's market position and specification. I'm sure they probably pondered whether doing another RL at all considering the current car's performance on the market compared to the E-Class, 5-Series, GS and A6. Honda's corporate culture won't let them justify the money, or lavish engineering needed to compete with cars like the E-Class or LS430. They're having to shake this small, 4-cylinder mentality to compete in other areas, so hopefully they'll see that there is some money to be made at the 40-60K level. Discouraging is that they've basically said that a V8 and RWD is out of the question. The current RL was a rare misstep for a usually right-on-the-money Honda. They were oh so wrong in even trying to say a V6 fwd car could compete with a a bunch of rwd V8 cars. I have never seen a company in which on of their cheaper cars (TL-S) shows up their flagship car so bad. This next TL and maybe RL are the last chance for Acura to get me interested in their cars again. Talk about one disappointment after another, thats all Acura has been, to me. It all started when the "Legend" left. Will all the time that has passed by since the current RL (1996) was introduced I expect something spectacular for 2005, dare I say a "segment buster".
Jul 14, 2003 (8:24 am)
The Legend was one of the best looking cars of the 90's no doubt but that was like 1995 when it left. Its time to move on from that time. I think Acura just got caught by Lexus when the Legend left. Acura is doing good now but Acura better hope the 04TL does not dissapoint since its moving into the 30K+ price range. Honda did dissapoint me with the new Accord. They had a chance to blow everybody away with the new Accord. The styling is so vanilla I don't know what happened there.
Jul 14, 2003 (9:18 am)
My thoughts on the RL. And I think Merc1 is probably correct in saying that Honda may have considered scrapping the RL. Honda has had more profitable projects to work on in recent years.
Based on the reception of the 2004 TL concept and the similarities we are seeing with the spy photos, I expect the new TL will enjoy success similar to the '99-03 model. I don't know that it will bust the segment wide-open, however it should keep its place as a respected offering. The shift upwards in price may not make people happy, but that move is necessary to separate Acura products from Hondas.
On the Accord, I think they nailed it. The styling up front combines current trends (swept back head lights and the rakish character line along the profile) with new designs like the convex/concave treatment over the fenders, the crease-less hood, and tiny grill. I think most folks are distracted by the problems in the back and fail to notice just how unique the front and profile look. On the functional end, the new model is cleaner, more powerful, more comfortable, more fuel efficient, and it offers more options. There are things to quibble about. I won't argue there. I just think the vehicle as a whole is just as strong as the out-going models.
Jul 14, 2003 (9:59 am)
Your right the back end does bother me. The side looks fine. I think the Accord Sedan the average age buyer is going up to much. The last time I looked the average age buyer for the Accord Sedan was 55. That has too be lowered down a little bit. Honda nailed the Accord styling to a tee in 1996 and in 1998. The 01 refresh was a step backwards and you know how I feel about the new one. 96-97 was the best looking Accord in my opinion most definately. The thing that dissapoints me the most is Honda released the TSX under the Acura emblem and it looks better than the Accord Sedan. Honda wants to charge 5-7K more than a 20,000 dollar Accord LX 4 cylinder auto model. That's just an awkward decision to do that.