Last post on Oct 29, 2013 at 10:48 PM
You are in the Acura TL
What is this discussion about?
Acura TL, Sedan
#70 of 135 Only problem with Acura is lack of focus/marketing
Dec 23, 2011 (5:36 pm)
We recently replaced my wife's 2000 TL with a 2012 TL. Actually, while the 2000 served us flawlessly for 12 years we were not really considering another one since there was so much noise being made by the competition like Lexus and Genesis. Still, after driving those we decided to also test drive the TL. Boy, what a wake-up call. It was so much sportier and BMW-like in its drive that it was a no brainer. The problem is that Acura doesn't advertise much and toot their horn as loudly as they should.
#71 of 135 Re: Only problem with Acura is lack of focus/marketing [dougsilver]
Dec 29, 2011 (11:59 am)
Acura's 2012 TL SH-AWD could be a wake up call for BMW and Audi if they believe their customers include VALUE or CONTENT FOR COST in their list of qualifiers (for purchase) -- which their customers may (but how much weight do Audi and BMW buyers place on value?)
I say this as a long time Audi owner/driver and also my wife has had 3 BMW's to boot. I ended up NOT with the car I wanted (a 2012 Audi A4 Prestige/Sport), but with the car that gave me the greatest value.
I believe Audi's implementation of AWD is better than Acura's -- then again the Audi did not have torque vectoring (and it was not available on the A4, only the far more expensive S4), and the Acura comes standard with it as long as you go AWD. So, while the RWD bias of the Audi is desirable, the entire engine, transmission deployment in the TL seems of incredibly high value (4 vs 6 cylinders, 211 HP vs 305, no torque vectoring vs torque vectoring.)
I believe the Audi is beautiful, inside and out -- the Acura's nose and butt job helped quite a bit, but the Audi is the looker. The Acura's interior is very good, but then again the Audi's is excellent -- yet the Acura gets the VALUE nod again, you gets a lot with the Acura, you CAN gets a lot with the Audi -- for big bucks.
The Audi has an 8-speed transmission, the Acura a 6-speed. Now, everything else the same, the 8-speed would be compelling; but the Audi has to make do in the under $50K price range with a four cylinder engine, that is very smooth and very torque-y, but it's up against Acura's also buttery smooth six cyliner engine that puts out nearly another 100HP and more torque, too. So, despite my wish for an 8-speed, the combination of engine and transmission in the Acura won me over (again the operative word is VALUE or CONTENT FOR THE PRICE).
Now, at 7,000 miles on the TL, I find it does a very good job of feeling nearly as taught and buttoned down as an Audi or BMW -- and the SH-AWD nearly removes the understeer and the nose heavy feel the Acura has every right to have (but doesn't, at least in SH-AWD and Advance trim -- which includes 19" shoes.)
Acura will survive without me if I don't re-up in 32 months, but so far only an attractive VALUE from a German brand (er, Audi or BMW) will really get my attention. Why?
I can't use all of the performance of a 211HP Audi A4 Sport, let alone use all of the power (and performance) of the Acura TL SH-AWD Advance -- but I want to have it, if possible, regardless of its country of origin.
The A4 would cruise all day long at 100MPH (if you could find a place that you could drive that fast for long periods) -- but so will the Acura.
The A4 does "go like a snake in a rat hole" (my wife's phrase, giving credit), the Acura is close, but not quite as "snakey" in the twisties. But to discern the difference, you have to go well over 80% to notice the Audi's better handling. Frankly, around here if you go that fast and push that hard it is very likely you will be heard saying ". . .well officer. . . ."
So, for the money, the TL (at the level of equipment I have, at least) does a great job of feeling like a credible entry-level luxury performance car. The Acura leans a little to the lux side and the Audi (or the BMW, for sure) leans to the performance side.
The Acura, however, gives you what prices out to be about $10,000+ more car than comparably contented A4's and 3 series cars.
I was pleasantly surprised.
#72 of 135 Acura Tl 2012
Dec 29, 2011 (2:22 pm)
Have a big Dilema, I have a 2009 Acura 2009 SH AWD, Love my car so much, the drive, handling and looks are so incredible. My Dealer is offering to take me out of my lease and put me in a 2012 TL SH AWD Premium. I am at a crossroads if I should go for it, I am not so crazy about the nose on the new one, I still get people giving me a thumbs up when my car is all clean and detailed. Mine is the Blue color that really stands out. Any body out there can give me a reason to change except for the 6 speed transmission.
#73 of 135 Re: Acura Tl 2012 [luv_acura]
Dec 29, 2011 (2:56 pm)
You haven't really given enough info to enable me to make a statement for or against, so I'll present facts and opinions that may prove useful. The 6 speed is a pretty big deal, but much of the car remains pretty much the same in the '12, so I've been told. I do believe that newer is generally better.
Can you get any color and interior combo you want or do you have to take something they offer, period?
What is an AWD Premium, there are, as far as I know three versions of the car:
And, with the AWD you do get the very nice 3.7L engine (305HP), which with the 6-speed auto is sweeet.
If, by Premium, you would be getting an Advance model, you will get: 19" wheels (they do look great); heated and cooled front seats; and, to me the most important feature -- blind spot warning.
The '12 is said to have been made much quieter than the previous models.
The '12 Advance now uses V rated all-season tires, rather than summer only tires as in prior years.
I am, very happy with mine -- and if the price was good, certainly the ability to get out of your lease early (without penalty, I am assuming) is attractive, especially if you can get that Blue color you like.
I hope these factoids and opinionoids were helpful.
#74 of 135 Re: Acura Tl 2012 [luv_acura]
Jan 03, 2012 (9:54 am)
Yup, they are trying to get me to trade up for the 2012 too- I also have the 2009 AWD TECH. My salesman keeps sending me reminders that he has a wonderful deal for me- yeah right, I know I would be paying for two cars but he makes it seems as if they would eat the remaining 2+ years of payments. I would advise you to keep your 2009, it has subtle details that are lacking on the 2012 like the follwing-chrome strip door handles and faux double quad pipes, these items really brings out the splendor in the car.
#75 of 135 Re: Acura Tl 2012 [luv_acura]
Jan 03, 2012 (1:56 pm)
Just leased another 2012 TL w Technology (not SH-AWD), formally had a 2009 (same) model. A few things noted:
1. The highway ride is definitely much smoother than before - both in acceleration and speed, thanks to the 6 speed transmission. You can overtake quite effortlessly, careful not to get a ticket though, it's a fast car! I’m sure the SH-AWD handles better.
2. Despite the powerful engine, it saves more gas! 20/29 vs. 18/26 miles (SH-AWD improved as well), not too shabby for a 3.5L.
3. The software and dash button layout is improved, i.e.: added a physical Phone button, renamed "Menu" button to "Destination", which makes more sense. My dealer says it has better voice recognition, I haven't tried it out.
4. The exterior door handles are now the same with body color. The interior door opener is now metal.
5. The nose & the butt – they make that front shield smaller to conform to the look of other models. The contour warps around better. Honestly, I still like the older TL, it just looks bolder and more aggressive, hate it or love it.
6. And yes, it is quieter. I love it.
#76 of 135 Re: Acura Tl 2012 [billyperksii]
Jan 03, 2012 (2:37 pm)
I recommend keeping the '09. The distinctiveness of the TL is lost with the '12. Unless you get the TL SH-AWD Advance pkg, you can't tell the difference between a regular TL Tech and the TL Tech SH-AWD until you see the SH-AWD sign on the back. The quad exhaust is what makes the TL SH-AWD. Everytime I see a '12 TL, it looks bland and reminds me of the Lexus ES350. Just my 2 cents....
#77 of 135 Re: 2012 TL with battery issues [2012tllove]
Jan 16, 2012 (6:20 pm)
I have also had battery issues with my TL AWD 2012. I purchased in April 2011 and started having the "Low Battery" alarm in September. My battery failed in November and January. They have no answers. I have it in the dealer again as we speak to have it checked out. Very frustrating. I have contacted Acura customer Service 3 times to document issues. I keep getting asked how often I drive it. I sometimes do not drive it on the weekends and no matter it should not have battery issues. I love the car, but this is very frustrating.
#78 of 135 Re: 2012 TL with battery issues [may17]
Jan 17, 2012 (7:57 am)
I have two vehicles that I drive and one of them sits in the driveway for sometimes several weeks without being started. No problems. I've had cars that have went two or three months between starts(during military deployments) and still had no problem starting. There is no excuse for what you're experiencing in regards to how often you drive it. When they ask you that....ask them why? It should make no difference.
#79 of 135 Re: 2012 TL with battery issues [2012tllove]
Jan 17, 2012 (11:34 am)
My 2012 TL SH-AWD, made in April 2011, has the same issue. The car did start easily. I then drove it to charge the battery. The next day I brought the TL to the dealer. The service advisor told that it's a false positive and not to worry. He showed me how to unclip the sensor from the battery to reset the sensor.
I don't trust the TL now. Acura ought to recall the cars.