Last post on Nov 05, 2013 at 12:08 PM
You are in the Acura RL
What is this discussion about?
Acura RL, Sedan
#5104 of 7386 Re: styling [y2ktony]
Dec 02, 2004 (11:53 am)
If I had to rank european brands based on cookie cutter styling, MB would rank on top. The only thing that really stands out in a typical Benz is the grill. Audi, would fit at the other end of the spectrum. If I were to pick a car solely based on exterior styling, Audi/VW could be it.
BMW has tried hard to move away from relatively docile styling but fell face first with the 7-series and to a lesser extent with the 5-series, enough to claim that 3-series will try not to follow its larger siblings.
Acura has managed to establish a theme with TSX and TL duo, but RL strays away from it. A reason could be that it is supposed to be a flagship and that can also mean a less aggressive style for understated looks. I notice creases and kinks reduce as you move away from cheaper offerings to the higher end of the spectrum.
The RL, IMO, received an evolutionary style from its own past, with subtle elements taken from other Acuras (of the mid-90s) like the shoulder line that wraps into the tail lamp (think 1996-1998 TL). Otherwise, a more angular/curvy/athletic 1996-2004 RL would look like the 2005 RL.
Here are two Acuras that have very similar front ends. Take a look at them and see if you notice a difference:
Hint: Check out the windshield wipers.
Things like these donít necessarily stand out, but minor details like these differentiate more expensive cars from others. This is true, inside and out and it often requires a better than normal analysis of styling. I would say, you feel the extra things that cost you a premium, you donít necessarily see them.
As for your comment on Lexus ES330, I can agree that it looks like a Camry (shares the profile completely but with different tail lamps and fascia), but LS430 has the ďgenericĒ understated look deserving of a luxury sedan. Simplicity is perhaps the key to doing it well. Use Audi as an example that tends to avoid excessive curves and creases, everything is very subtle and flows together.
Dec 02, 2004 (12:19 pm)
Iím not sure where youíre getting your numbers from but current RL has the largest interior dimensions if you compare it to current 5-series, E-class and A6. A lot of people are talking (only) about rear seat space (which is still measured at 44 cu ft, BTW), but forget completely about the space front seat gets. Acuraís measurements on spec sheet are biased towards front seat measurements. You get the most rear seat legroom in RL (if you care to move the front seat a little).
And comparing 3-series to RL makes absolutely no sense to me. If you do, youíre making 5-series a redundancy in BMW lineup. As far as the current 3-series goes, it is a sub-compact right now, and increase in interior dimension could make it a compact sedan similar to Acura TSX.
#5106 of 7386 Re: Owners only: Why not rate the 05 RL on the Edmunds rating page [r2917]
Dec 02, 2004 (1:03 pm)
Why it should be compared to the Lexus LS430?
In the states, if you don't need nav, and if you shop it, you can buy a new 2005 LS430 for less than an RL. Why shouldn't the top lexus be compared, when Acura prices the RL in that market?
Dec 02, 2004 (1:08 pm)
Get real some of you visitors here. Comparing a rinky dink little 3 series to the most advanced car in the mid-luxury class of today. What a joke, lets compare the S2000 to the SL500 while were at it also.
The E class is dull driving, boring safe car design and not even a sport sedan in the RL's league. Their heavy use of unreliable, inferior to Japan electronics is one big reason why the E class, C class and S class are all on the "poor quality" problem lists as the latest C.R. survey indicates. The once strong german makes are in big trouble quality wise today, the domestic makers all have better quality then them.
Those who remember the awesome last Legend coupe ad campaign "It's not for everyone. Nor was it meant to be." That's what the RL is.
#5108 of 7386 robertsmx (dimensions)
Dec 02, 2004 (1:27 pm)
robertsmx, I beg you to please go and actually sit in the backseat of the E-class and the A6 with the front seats positioned as you would have them when you're driving. You keep talking about the "numbers," but the numbers just don't "add up" when you actually sit in the cars the RL's backseat is being compared to. Regardless of what the numbers say, the RL's backseat doesn't feel as spacious or comfortable as the others; and it doesn't look it either.
We all know you can move the front seats forward to provide more rearseat room, but who wants to be sitting on top of the steering wheel?? Did you go from driving a compact car to the RL? That's about the only way I can see someone calling it [the RL's backseat] spacious.
#5109 of 7386 Re: robertsmx (dimensions) [tayl0rd]
Dec 02, 2004 (2:55 pm)
E-Class had a tight rear seat when I compared it to the old RL. The new RL is better than the old RL. I have to see the new A6 in person, but from the looks of it, I wouldnít call it having an edge over the RL. That should happen sometime soon. Iím more keen on front seat space and overall feel of the car though, from steering feedback to bolstering on the seats. Thatís where I spend 100% of my time in my car.
As for spec sheets being misleading, we have been through it during our trunk space debate. So, I'm more than aware of the differences. And I'm used to midsize sedan (on the larger side of the spectrum), so RL is large enough for me. But I can see an issue with someone who might be moving from a full size sedan that RL is not.
#5110 of 7386 C&D 10-Best - 2005
Dec 02, 2004 (3:22 pm)
I mentioned a possibility couple of days ago that Acura RL would make it to C&D 10-Best this year, and apparently, it did! TSX and RL represent Acura in the list that I've seen.
#5111 of 7386 Re: Owners only: Why not rate the 05 RL on the Edmunds rating page [cove148]
Dec 02, 2004 (4:02 pm)
Given that the 2005 LS430 with the least expensive "required" option package comes in at about 58K as per the lexus website, I think your assertion is simply not true unless your Acura dealer in question is fleecing you for several thousand dollars and your Lexus dealer is giving you a huge deal.
#5112 of 7386 Re: styling [y2ktony]
Dec 02, 2004 (4:21 pm)
What's wrong with Accord or Camry? Because they look so bad, or really because they are not exclusive enough? What if there's no Honda or Toyota at all, would those Acura or Lexus cars still be too common? What if MB sells economy A and B classes here like they do in Germany, and since they all look alike, would the E320 still look that good/special?
I actually think most German luxy cars do have a edge in look department but all three major Japanese lux. lines are catching up. But if looking like Honda or Toyota is a major issue for you, then that's no easy way out other then just going with MB/BMW. See MB and BMW don't have their Honda and Toyota's counterparts to dim your prestige factor, and Acura and Lexus can't really break away from Honda and Toyota.
#5113 of 7386 Re: styling [y2ktony]
Dec 02, 2004 (4:47 pm)
I hate to disagree with you, but one of the Korean car companies now makes a car with headlights that look just like the MB E320. And in my opinion you can't tell the difference between the E320 and the C series from a short distance. This is something that all the car companies seem to share right now.