Last post on May 14, 2009 at 12:42 PM
You are in the Acura RL
What is this discussion about?
Acura RL, Future Vehicle, Sedan
#75 of 138 Re: [kenb757]
Jul 10, 2008 (2:51 pm)
You need to take into consideration how a car is driven. If you have a lead foot, your mpg will suffer. If you cruise btn 55-65, you have optimum mpg.
For reference, see this link about real world RL mpg:kamdog, "Acura RL Real World Fuel Economy" #1, 28 Mar 2007 12:24 pm. The 09 RL has a bigger engine, and is supposedly tuned for quicker pick up and acceleration. Thus, mpg is likely worse than 05-08 models.
#76 of 138 Re: Is the RL Just an Over-the-Top Accord? [kenb757]
Jul 11, 2008 (7:28 am)
I agree, there are very similar styling lines in the RL and the Accord and for me the RL really does not stand out in its class (A6,BMW5,M45 and E-Class).
Combined with the requirement to use premium fuel, its poor fuel efficiency and the styling, i doubt that anyone looking at other members of its class will get the RL (and you should even look at the Jaguar XF which is $49K and 18/26MPG).
I always loved Acura but i think that i may skip this generation. But you do get more amenities/options for less that the other brands (but do you really need them)
#77 of 138 Re: Is the RL Just an Over-the-Top Accord? [kurtkbee]
Jul 12, 2008 (6:34 am)
But you do get more amenities/options for less that the other brands (but do you really need them)
What does "need" really have to do with any car in this category? Can any of us really say we need the things luxury cars offer?
#78 of 138 Re: Is the RL Just an Over-the-Top Accord? [nebraskaguy]
Jul 12, 2008 (9:18 am)
#79 of 138 2009 here, and gone
Jul 22, 2008 (6:31 am)
I received an e-mail yesterday morning from my salesman informing me they finally had a 2009. I called this morning to arrange a test drive and he informed me they sold their only one yesterday afternoon! So, someone must have really loved it!
#80 of 138 Rear Leg Room Not Changed
Jul 22, 2008 (7:06 pm)
This is a major disappointment. Even though I swear I read somewhere that the 2009 RL would offer more room in the rear. Although, I must admit I was wondering how they would accomplish this since they were not changing the basic design. Basically, Acura does not make a sedan that is not tight in the rear. Oddly enough, the Honda Accord offers plenty of leg room. Why can't the TL offer the same amount of leg room since it is built on the same platform as the Accord? How is it that the TL ends up with less leg room in the rear and a smaller trunk. Why are luxury cars built under the Acura badge smaller than those built under the Honda badge? What is so luxurious about being cramped? I just don't get it. I would think that increasing passenger volume in sedans would be a selling point for manufacturers since I would think a lot of buyers will be switching from SUV to cars.
#81 of 138 Re: Rear Leg Room Not Changed [ocim]
Jul 23, 2008 (3:11 am)
I agree with all your points. I think Acura is making a mistake by not correcting this problem.
#82 of 138 Re: Rear Leg Room Not Changed [ocim]
Jul 23, 2008 (3:15 am)
This is a major disappointment. Even though I swear I read somewhere that the 2009 RL would offer more room in the rear.
Just the other day, I received an e-mail from Acura and one of the improvements touted was increased rear leg room. This despite the brochure I received earlier which listed all specs, including rear leg room that was exactly the same as the 2008. So, someplace there's a disconnect.
#83 of 138 New RL for 2010?
Jul 25, 2008 (5:36 pm)
I read somewhere there is a totally new RL coming in 2010? Can anyone verify?
#84 of 138 Re: New RL for 2010? [genesis6]
Jul 25, 2008 (10:57 pm)
Yes the 2011 RL will debut in 2010. Thats when it will likely get a v8 and a RWD based platform. The v8 will likely have VCM and other fuel saving technologies.