Last post on Nov 05, 2013 at 12:08 PM
You are in the Acura RL
What is this discussion about?
Acura RL, Sedan
#3316 of 7386 Type of gas and gas mileage on 2002 RL
Aug 08, 2004 (9:58 am)
This is a great message board for we Acura lovers!
I don't get great mileage on my RL--probably under 20 mpg in local driving and a little over 20 mpg on highway driving. If i ever get 24 mpg on the highway that would be the best.
I use the most expensive 93 octane gas which is what Acura recommends. I recall reading in one of the posts that someone was running their RL on 87 octane (regular gas). Have any of you had any experience with using either 87 or 89 octane in your RL, which obviously would lower the rediculously high cost of gas right now. I was thinking of trying a lower octane out of curiosity, but would appreciate some feedback first.
#3317 of 7386 Re: Type of gas and gas mileage on 2002 RL [adamar1]
Aug 08, 2004 (9:39 pm)
Modern engines are coupled with computers/sensors that can detect lower grade octane and retard timing of ignition to protect engines. If you try it, it probably would work fine but you may feel some loss of power during hard acceleration.
Like what people say at the gates, however, PROCEED AT YOUR OWN RISK.
As for the fold down rear seat, it usually compromises structure integrity a bit. I have read the torsional rigidity numbers of BMW 5-series (E39) with and without fold down rear seats. The former is less by about 5-10%.
#3318 of 7386 Re: Type of gas and gas mileage on 2002 RL [adamar1]
Aug 09, 2004 (6:32 am)
A modern engine designed to run on or requiring high octane fuel may have electronic engine management controls that will sense and allow the use of lower octane fuels without serious damage to the engine, perhaps without any damage whatsoever (within reason, however, you should probably not run 87 in a car that specifies 93, but 89 would be OK).
Here is the thing, though -- you cannot afford to use lower priced gasoline (if for the lower price you get lower octane that is). This is what is called a false economy.
Sure the engine management system will do everything it can to prevent harmful pre-ignition (ping). But think what is really happening -- the spark is RETARDED. The explosion happens sooner with the lower octane fuel than with the higher octane fuel.
The car will attempt (and you as a driver will encourage this with your right foot) to maintain power -- how does it do this you may ask?
It burns more gasoline -- simply put.
Someone, somewhere probably has some pretty nifty formula for figuring out the extra cost of using mid grade vs premium for example (and it is probably generally accurate). But, you may find out that the drop in price of $.10 per gallon (from $1.95 to $1.85 here in Cincinnati for Premium and Mid-grade) is MORE than made up for in the increase in fuel used, to say nothing of the potential (however slight) engine damage that could be taking place even with the best engine management computers.
Auto manufacturers, as far as I know, do not specify minimum octane requirements on a whim or as a suggestion -- they are specified for performance which means power and efficiency (and no risk of engine damage).
Use lower than specified octane gas at your wallet's risk.
Aug 09, 2004 (8:57 am)
Your RL MPG will improve as the mileage increases. I'm at 138k miles. I do mostly highway driving and average 23.5 MPG. Premium 93 gas isn't too bad in my area at $2.03
#3320 of 7386 Re: Type of gas and gas mileage on 2002 RL [adamar1]
Aug 10, 2004 (7:17 pm)
Thank you one and all for the very well thought out and intelligent replies to my message. Based on your advice, I will stick with the high octane gas (93) in my RL! I had to satisfy my curiosity. If I can afford the RL then I should be able to afford the premium gas!
#3321 of 7386 Re: Top Gear C6 Vette Review [proe]
Aug 10, 2004 (7:44 pm)
Here's the high quality version of that Top Gear C6 Review:
I'm not sure how the 2005 RL discussion veered into the 2005 Corvette, but to bring it back on topic, my father is seriously thinking of getting a new sedan to replace his 1996 Chrysler Cirrus. Right now, he's debating between Lexus (ES330) and Acura (TL). I'm trying to convince him to wait an extra month or 2 to check out the RL. What do you think? Thanks.
#3322 of 7386 RL versus MB, BMW, etc.
Aug 10, 2004 (7:52 pm)
I read with interest the following paragraph which I cut from an article on the "best selling cars", under automobiles, on the netscape home page:
"Perhaps the most interesting cars on the list are the two most expensive sedans from Infiniti, Nissan Motor's premium brand (i.e., the $43,000 M45 and the $52,000 Q45. The Q45 finds itself overwhelmed in the premium sedan market, where many buyers want a European car and have several excellent options from which to choose (BMW 7 Series, Mercedes-Benz S-Class, Jaguar XJ, Audi A8 L).
Those buyers who want a premium Japanese sedan ordinarily find that the Lexus LS 430 is all they need. Acura's sedan flagship, the RL, does not do well for the same reasons." (i.e., the preference for European cars over Japanese cars).
From the many messages I have read from RL enthusiasts, we are for the most part a happy lot and are not interested in the fancy and often more expensive European cars. In fact, many of the messages are from those individuals who have owned or driven these European cars and would still opt for an RL.
I would like to encourage some discussion as to what market we think the RL is catering to and who is the prototypical owner who gravitates to an RL instead of comparably priced European or other Japanese cars. Is the RL trying to eventually compete with some of the top European cars? The RL is certainly moving up the ladder in terms of price (which concerns me because the bargain days will soon be past history), yet it still does not apparently measure up to the top European cars. Certainly the lack of: rear wheel drive, a V-8 engine, and more horsepower has held back the RL, in addition to what is considered a somewhat bland design.
It will be interesting to see the eventual reception for the new 2005 RL (i.e., newly redesigned, all wheel drive and much more horsepower, but no V-8), which I will consider during the next year, and perhaps make comparisons with other cars in that price range during the process of making a decision. Alternatively, I may just live with my 2002 RL for many years, considering that I am extremely happy with it!
I would appreciate your thoughts!
#3323 of 7386 Re: RL versus MB, BMW, etc. [adamar1]
Aug 10, 2004 (8:13 pm)
I see your point about buyers who will shell out $40+ thousand will want a European (usually German) car. But what scares me about BMWs, M-Bs, Audis, etc. is their reliability. Or more precisely, the lack thereof.
I admit that it's also controversial that Acura's flagship car does not have a V-8 engine. But in these days where premium gas costs $2-3/gal. in the US (and presumably a lot more elsewhere) coupled with the fact that the 2005 RL's "miniscule" V6 is still pumping out 300 HP, I don't think Acura erred.
#3324 of 7386 adamar, bewoulf
Aug 11, 2004 (5:36 am)
my 2 cents. If you look at the demographics of german car owners, you see a huge increase in the past 6 odd years. A lot of this has to do with the economy of the 90s, excessively cheap gas, and being clueless about what it really means to own an expensive car. Most German cars in the modern electronic era have been issue prone. But traditionally, if you had $$$ to plunk on an expensive car, you had $$$ to repair it and move on with life. Back then, more expensive cars were owned by really well off people or by their companies. Today a lot of really financially borderline people drive high $ car due to low interest rates, a high cluelessness about cost of ownership and the power of rebates & leases. It's a cyclical issue, I think. As a lot of the current german car owners wade past 4-5 years of car ownership and find the hassle and cost of long term ownership nighmarish, they will start to drop out of the realms of the bmw's and mercedes. I personally feel this is the long term target market of the Acura's & Lexus's. I'm personally not all that positive about Infiniti/Nissan quality, but my bias is based on experiences 2 years ago or prior, so I could be wrong.
There was a time, back in 99, when the TL's were considered wannabe's in the ES's market, which was largely made up of people who were caught between the bland C's & E's of the 90s and the high maintenance 3's. Today, the TL is literally the darling of the crowd, you have people who conciously go buy a TL despite its torque steer and not a real bmw 3 driving experience... with the TSX/TL, acura really came full circle in the car (not suv) market to establish themselves as serious players.
Personally the AWD in the RL interests me, the technology in every Acura/Honda interested me, even if the engines were louder than comparable toyota's. I've been a long term fan of the NSX. Despite all the criticism that has been leveled out against the NSX I can tell you, 99% of those people have not once set foot inside the NSX. That a 13 year old design can still play it out, if not win in its car-class is a testimony to how far ahead of its time NSX was in all possible terms. No wonder, compared to other cars in its class the NSX holds value fairly well....
Bringing me back to the RL. I think the RL is going to play a poacher's game, just like the TL did in 99. Whether they win or not, I can't predict. Personally I love the technology in the new RL, but the older RL's statesque bland looks were more beautiful to my eyes. I may eventually not buy the car, but I still love to go test drive just about every cart on 4 wheels they put out there.
#3325 of 7386 Re: RL versus MB, BMW, etc. [beowulf7]
Aug 11, 2004 (5:37 am)
I agree with you, and even today, it is still puzzled me why European cars do not have good quality control that is worse than Korean cars.
Again, V6 vs. V8 or V10 or V12, IMO, it is meaningless in the real world for the following reasons.
First, it has to do with the needs not wants. As we all know a very goo car design is not just about engines only. Just look at MINI, or Lotus and you will understand.
Second, the target buyers. I do not think most of people will drive RL daily as some kind of time trial, so why should Honda come out a car that only 2% of people in the market would buy it. I think someone has pointed out this a while back. And, I think in that respect, Lexus is an excellent choice if they could add a little soul to the car.