Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Sedans Acura TL Acura RL vs. Acura TL
162 messages, Last post on Jul 29, 2008 at 6:24 AM
You are in the Acura TL Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens
|
Replying to: ocim (Sep 11, 2006 4:36 pm) |
|
|
I came within an inch of buying an 06 RL over the weekend. Fortunately the dealer was out of stock so I had time to re-think. I have an 04 TL non-navi and was looking to move up to real-time traffic and navi. My main motivation was probably my love of a bargain. Ten grand off is a powerful motivator! Here's what held me back. Financing is high even with the current special. I got 2.9% on my last car--below the rate of inflation. I love my TL. I like the RL. The RL is very grown up--not sure I am. Both cars have 5 star safety ratings. The TL gets better gas mileage and hauls a** when you stomp on it. Forty G's is a lot of dough, even with a substantial income. And the 07 TL navi has satellite traffic and is said to have a bit softer ride. I'll be test driving an 07 TL soon!! Don't think the RL is really for me. |
|
|
Replying to: acurat (Nov 27, 2006 6:41 am) Realistically, the price difference is about 5-6k?? For that, you get 300hp and AWD along with driving Acura's "flagship." Have you considered waiting for the 4G TL?
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: ggesq (Nov 27, 2006 8:31 am) From what I've read/heard, the TL, even with the less hp, offers better performance than the RL (better power/weight probably). With more interior room and, imo, much better exterior style. To me, the added weight, complexity and performance/economy drains of AWD have not been attractive to me vs. FWD. As a New Englander/skier I've always been willing to sacrifice the 9-10/10ths handling virtues of RWD for the foul-weather advantage of FWD, especially since I believe that many of today's FWD Honda/Acura's can probably handle as well/better than some lessor RWDs. |
|
|
Replying to: ggesq (Nov 27, 2006 8:31 am) Regarding the RL vs. TL comparison, I find the TL more fun to drive and more stylish inside and out. Since depreciation takes its toll partly based on model year, the more apt financial comparison is between the 06 RL and 06 TL--still about a $10K spread even at fire-sale prices. Understood that the 06 TL does not have all the bells and whistles of the 07. Now that real-time traffic is available on the TL navi, the rationale for spending the extra dough on the RL has pretty much evaporated for me. There, I feel so much better! Maybe I'll take a nice vacation with my wife. Driving, of course. 
|
|
|
Replying to: acurat (Nov 27, 2006 10:09 pm) Can't wait until Honda/Acura sells the CTDI engines in american models. That'll give the TL and RL SCARY torque! -Cj 
|
|
|
Replying to: tommyg29 (Dec 26, 2005 4:55 pm) I am very impressed with the TL. It is edgier, sportier and in some ways more responsive than the RL. For my tastes, it was too firm riding for the awful roads I drive. But the primary reason I considered and then bought the RL was the build quality of the TL. My TL had rattles, squeaks, ill fitted interior panels, loosely clipped on bumper facias, leather issues, interior material issues and jerky shifting. It impressed me on paper, and in style, but not by the seat of my pants in daily driving. The assembly issues are not what I expected from Acura. I did not found it particularly better assembled than other US built vehicles. The RL is superior in build quality and materials. It is Japanese built (worldwide known as Honda Legend). I also appreciate the refined ride without compromising too much performance. Being the RL does not crash over every bump, I actually drive it more spirited than my TL. It corners extremely well with SHAWD as opposed to the FWD characteristics of the TL. Economy is similar where the RL averages 1-2 mpg avg less than my TL. The RL is everything I expected from Acura and affirms my belief that US build cars are not as good as overseas builds, even for Japanese monikers (US built Toyotas have similar issues). Now I paid 35k for my TL new. I got the RL for 40K new. In my opinion that RL is worth every penny of the difference. (Although I did not look at the RL when I bought the TL, at that time RLs sold near 50K). It is solid, impeccably assembled, the details are apparent and it feels, sounds and drives to my expectations. The cars are decidedly different rides. But if the ride characteristics are not the deciding factor, I would closely examine build quality and content when justifying cost differential. At 40K the RL was a no brainer for me. |
|
|
Strongly considered another (2007) TL to replace my 2004 non-navi but ultimately decided it was time for a grown-up car. By the time I decided, all the 2006 RL non-techs except demos and weird colors were gone. Seeing as how you would have to be nuts to pay list price, I called around and got an offer on a 2006 Tech CMBS-PAX in black/ebony at $100 over dead cost (invoice minus $4K minus holdback). I did a little online research on the PAX tires. Honda Odyssey owners don't dig them but they seem OK on Acuras. Figured the CMBS might save me from a crash someday. Dickered over the trade, got them to come up $1100 from their initial offer and went for it at $42,475 with splash guards. That's about $11K south of MSRP. My 7-year-old son, securely belted in the back, commented, "Dad, this car ROCKS!" I must agree. We flew down the 405 in the rain and felt very secure with the SH-AWD and CMBS operating. It was fun following our progress on the superb Alpine navi unit. The Bose stereo sounds better than the TL's excellent ELS rig. Got OnStar, Bluetooth and XM working. There are a LOT more mysterious buttons which the 400+ page main manual and the 150-page navi manual promise to explain. I miss my sweet-but-squeaky TL a little bit. Left a few bucks on the table on the trade. I'm sure I'll get over it! Now this RL is a CAR.
|
|
|
Replying to: acurat (Dec 10, 2006 12:49 am) I felt guilty trading my TL, for about a day. The RL will remind you of all you love in your TL, but much more. The RL is truly an underappreciated car. I could see me running the RL for years, where the TL is in fashion. If you bought the 07 TL you would have been itching when the next generation was released in a year or two. The RL will age better IMHO. You will find the RL smoother, quieter yet sufficiently sporty. The FWD irks are gone. The NAVI and voice commands are much better than the TL. You will use the voice commands much more as they work much better in the RL (perhaps due to the quieter cabin?). But when you first clean your new RL, you will see how much better it is assembled, how more solid the car feels and how much better the materials are (especially the cabin). And for the cost over the TL, they SHOULD be. I still love the TL styling. But they are everywhere. I think I see more TL than Accords anymore. But I also love the RL. It has grown on me, more and more. I like the exclusivity of the RL. I get MORE compliments on the RL than the TL. The TL is edgier, but the RL just looks more substantial in person, and has more presence. I have read in several forums where TL to RL owners are finding similar benefits. Enjoy the RL. Mine is 4 months old and 4k miles. Not a creak or rattle, and I know this was the car I should have bought. You got a great price, and unless you wait for end of 2007 model year, unlikely you would get an Acura flagship for that price again. Oh yeah, your son has better taste than some car critics! Enjoy the ride.
|
|
|
Replying to: tamparl (Dec 10, 2006 5:48 am) Maybe. The RL will have a FMC for MY 2009. Many rumors about what will be underneath the hood as well as Acura's future styling direction. You don't think you'll have an itch or two in a couple of years wanting the next generation RL? Congrats on your new RL 
|
|
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2011 Acura RL
2010 Acura TL
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
