Acura Aghast at Consumer Reports’ Last-Place Ranking

[regfootball]

http://wardsauto.com/ar/acura_consumer_reports/

boo fricking hoo......

Acura Aghast at Consumer Reports’ Last-Place Ranking

By Christie Schweinsberg

WardsAuto.com, Jan 9, 2008 2:44 PM

Consumer Reports’ 2008 Car Brand Perception Survey shows the usual suspects, Toyota and Honda, atop the heap, but finds Honda’s upscale marque in the basement – which shocks brand officials.

“In a nutshell we would disagree with the assessment that Acura would fall that low in any survey,” an Acura company spokesman tells Ward’s. “Our research shows Acura is ranking high in technology aspects and brand awareness and those types of things.”

Rankings are based on a blind telephone survey conducted last month to judge how consumers perceive industry brands on performance, safety, quality, value, performance, environmental friendliness, design and technical innovation.

Data collected from 1,720 U.S. adults found Toyota and Honda brands are perceived as the best by a wide margin. Ford, Chevrolet and GMC were third, fourth and fifth, respectively.

On an aggregate basis, Toyota and Honda earned scores of 189 and 146. Acura received eight points, finishing below Audi (14 points), Mitsubishi (21 points) and Mercury (22 points).

“We didn’t get a lot of feedback on Acura,” says Ed Farrell, associate director for the magazine’s survey team. “All these questions were unaided. The first lead-off question is, ‘When you think of cars available for sale in America, what cars do you think of?’”

Farrell says respondents then were asked questions relating to attributes, such as “When you think of performance, what car best typifies to you performance?”

Acura says brand awareness high in own surveys.

In many categories, Acura “didn’t come up as a single mention,” Farrell tells Ward’s.

While Acura models have tested well in the magazine’s evaluations, there is “something about the brand that isn’t resonating as strong as other premium brands,” says Jeff Bartlett, deputy autos editor for Consumer Reports.

must explain the crappy sales!!!!!!!!!

that and no v8! Go Hyundai!!!!!!!!!

[regfootball]

carbiz can expand on this.....

“We always seem to make the assumption that consumers are perfectly logical and have full information and understand exactly what’s going on,” says Dave Bussiere, assistant marketing professor and MBA program director at the University of Windsor’s Odette School of Business in Windsor, ON, Canada.

“They’re fully willing to answer any question based on gut reaction.”

[deftonesfan867]

Honestly, most Americans don't know about Acura I'd assume.

[Camino LS6]

More like most Americans have forgotten about Acura.

[Guest YellowJacket894]

More like most Americans have forgotten about Acura.

Who could blame them? Acura, as well as Lexus, are brands without pedigree or prestige. They're just nice cars, at best, nothing more.

Buy a Cadillac, then you get something more than just a "nice car."

[regfootball]

acura has no real history. no history in this country. no big racing history. no cultural significance. it has created nothing to the growth of our country or economy.

the NSX was a great image car but they gave up on it and never renewed it.

they lost model identity when they renamed cars like legend and vigor and integra into "TL" and "TSX" and "RSX".

they lost a lot of faithful when they abandoned coupes.

They blatantly rebadge euro accords into TL's and Civics into "EL's".

But perhaps the biggest problem they have is that the faithful Honda bunch sticks with Honda because its frugal efficient soulless appliance character is so strong, that it counteracts the exact nature of luxury. When you get to the point where you can afford true luxury, all of a sudden consumer reports and gas mileage and perfect reliability is not the main reason why you pick a car. Emotion, soul, frivolity, excess....all things that go against the notion of a 'Honda' to the very core. Or worse yet, you scold yourself for wanting an RL, when you could get the exact same size car for 1/3 the price. And gosh, you don't NEED more than an Accord if you love hondas.

honda is into efficient engineering. that is the opposite of EXCESS.

well, hold on, we got "vtec" and "SHAWD". woo hoo. build a brand on that.

Edited January 11, 2008 by regfootball

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

“In a nutshell we would disagree with the assessment that Acura would fall that low in any survey,” an Acura company spokesman tells Ward’s. “Our research shows Acura is ranking high in technology aspects and brand awareness and those types of things.”

Typical asian arrogance...

Data collected from 1,720 U.S. adults found Toyota and Honda brands are perceived as the best by a wide margin. Ford, Chevrolet and GMC were third, fourth and fifth, respectively.

1) With only 2000 responses, why are they wasting their time anyway.

2) How in the hell does Ford, with all of the negative propaganda about quality/gas guzzlers/etc, still rank 3rd in this import biased survey.

While Acura models have tested well in the magazine’s evaluations, there is “something about the brand that isn’t resonating as strong as other premium brands,” says Jeff Bartlett, deputy autos editor for Consumer Reports.

It's called PASSION The Acura division has the literal appeal of a new computer (Especially with all of the techno junk) Sure, it's stylish... Sure, it's cool... But are you as passionate about buying that new dell appliance as you would be a Burberry scarf? Nope.

As much as I love spitting on Acura, this survey shows more than anything else how UNRELIABLE and INVALID anything out of Consumer Reports really is.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

Who could blame them? Acura, as well as Lexus, are brands without pedigree or prestige. They're just nice cars, at best, nothing more.

Buy a Cadillac, then you get something more than just a "nice car."

The only thing that seperates Lexus from Acura is snob appeal... You can presumably turn up your nose to everything else on the road if you're driving a Lexus. Whereas, Acura doesn't even have that same cache, much less anything else. Just wait until Lexus quality falls some more, then we'll start seeing them at the bottom of surveys because suddenly, it won't be that special to drive one anymore.

Edited January 11, 2008 by FUTURE_OF_GM

[CARBIZ]

Scenario: you are in the middle of beating your wife, the phone rings and it is a telephone survey. Do you A) hang up on them or B) answer their stupid questions to just get them off the phone?

I suppose blind telephone surveys are marginally more 'accurate' than those mail-in surveys from a captive demographic (if only because blind surveys are more random, but in all cases I still contend that only the persons will polarized views will bother to respond.

These surveys prove nothing, other than the fact the media is starved for any real news.

I see a lot of Acuras around here, but most of the people I know that have them only have them for pure snob appeal. One friend of mine, who leased a 2000 3.2 had no idea how many cylinders it had, how many hp - nada. Only that he was 'told' it was a good car. Yeah, but it ran on premium gas and he was freaking about the $700 lease payment. I laughed at him: I could have leased him a GLS Intrigue for $150 less a month AND it ran on regular gas.

[siegen]

I'm not going to argue that Acura needs to work on the image, but this ranking is simply laughable.

Data collected from 1,720 people? Out of 300 million? How can anyone read that and not lol?

[NOS2006]

Who could blame them? Acura, as well as Lexus, are brands without pedigree or prestige. They're just nice cars, at best, nothing more.

Buy a Cadillac, then you get something more than just a "nice car."

I wouldn't even give Lexus that much credit. Toyota puts no more work into Lexus than they do the Camry or anything else. Lexus really is $h!. Acura, however, is that "nice car" you were talking about. I really liked the RL and TL Type-S I was able to check out. I liked the RDX, too, though I was terribly amused by its interior that was literally falling apart.

"SHAWD". woo hoo. build a brand on that.

Actually, I've only been in one vehicle with SHAWD (the RDX), and I was really impressed.

[siegen]

I also did a survey about the relevance of cars. I talked to each person and asked them questions about the cars they liked the most. Here is the ranking:

1. Toyota

2. Cadillac

3. Honda

4. Chevrolet

You can draw several conclusions from these results. First, it's simply amazing that Ford isn't on the list at all. It must mean that America no longer cares about Ford. Also, not finding Saturn on the list at all means that GM's attempts to resurrect Saturn have failed miserably. Also of note, that there are no German or Korean brands. These cars must have zero relevance in America now. Among Chevrolet, the Blazer was actually the highest ranked model; which shows that GM missed the mark with the new Malibu. From these results GM should continue to pursue SUV's. And also the best Cadillacs were made in the 80's, as determined by these results. Lastly, we were able to confirm that the Toyota Corolla is indeed the best car in America, in every way.

(Data was collected from 2 U.S. adults.)

[FAPTurbo]

I also did a survey about the relevance of cars. I talked to each person and asked them questions about the cars they liked the most. Here is the ranking:

1. Toyota

2. Cadillac

3. Honda

4. Chevrolet

You can draw several conclusions from these results. First, it's simply amazing that Ford isn't on the list at all. It must mean that America no longer cares about Ford. Also, not finding Saturn on the list at all means that GM's attempts to resurrect Saturn have failed miserably. Also of note, that there are no German or Korean brands. These cars must have zero relevance in America now. Among Chevrolet, the Blazer was actually the highest ranked model; which shows that GM missed the mark with the new Malibu. From these results GM should continue to pursue SUV's. And also the best Cadillacs were made in the 80's, as determined by these results. Lastly, we were able to confirm that the Toyota Corolla is indeed the best car in America, in every way.

(Data was collected from 2 U.S. adults.)

I'm not a big fan of Acrua, but jumping on these numbers is a waste of time, just like anything from Consumer Reports.

[AxelTheRed]

Acura is a wholly unimpressive marque.

[siegen]

Acura is a wholly unimpressive marque.

Until you get behind the wheel. :AH-HA_wink:

[Drew Dowdell]

Until you get behind the wheel. :AH-HA_wink:

and notice how well they've managed to copy Honda.

[The O.C.]

and notice how well they've managed to copy Honda.

Dude....they ARE Honda.....

(you MUST have been sarcastic....)

[Drew Dowdell]

Dude....they ARE Honda.....

(you MUST have been sarcastic....)

[The O.C.]

LMFAO....!

[Z-06]

:rotflmao:

[regfootball]

I wouldn't even give Lexus that much credit. Toyota puts no more work into Lexus than they do the Camry or anything else. Lexus really is $h!. Acura, however, is that "nice car" you were talking about. I really liked the RL and TL Type-S I was able to check out. I liked the RDX, too, though I was terribly amused by its interior that was literally falling apart.

Actually, I've only been in one vehicle with SHAWD (the RDX), and I was really impressed.

yeah but A- shawd is a dumb name. put it on a ricer civic. and b- isn't shawd and saab's cross wheel drive the same thing?

ford's response was so high because fusion, focus, 500, etc. all have been getting good reliability scores lately in CR.

[Sixty8panther]

Acura to me = Honda that you get fu&$ed extra hard on in terms of purchase price.

[thegriffon]

yeah but A- shawd is a dumb name. put it on a ricer civic. and b- isn't shawd and saab's cross wheel drive the same thing?

ford's response was so high because fusion, focus, 500, etc. all have been getting good reliability scores lately in CR.

It is similar, yes. BMW is introducing a GKN/ZF system which does the same thing as well. SH-AWD seems to go further though in actively proportioning torque to one side in order to actually steer the car through corners. Of course much the same effect could be achieved with the open-differential+traction-control system used by Cadillac, but with higher brake wear.

Acura's response is stupid. You don't bury your head in the sand and claim you are famous, really you are, when you get a result like this. A survey like this is only worthwhile as an internal reality check. They should be saying "this is terrible—how do we fix this before Honda-san starts sending out ceremonial swords?"

Edited January 12, 2008 by thegriffon

[regfootball]

acura needs to do a few couple things.

1- drop the prices some on the MDX and RDX.

2- bring back the prelude as an INTEGRA

3- RWD biased v6 and v8 LEGEND

4- convert the TSX into VIGOR

5- revive the NSX

6- move the S2000 over to Acura and redesign it.

learn about design.

keep up on powertrains.

stop being so japanese.

Edited January 12, 2008 by regfootball

[Justin Bimmer]

In defense of Consumer Reports (I know I know) A Random Digit Dialing phone survey involving the number of people they surveyed has been researched and demonstrated by the universities of this country to be a statistically valid form of getting information from the public. That being said, there is also a margin of error that must be reported to show that the rankings would have a range that each one would fall into which would place one brand above the other.

It is totally possible for some or mabe all of the brand to fall inside the margin of error in this survey.

[thegriffon]

There is a perception problem about the results too. It sounds like this is a measure of who is most associated with certain criteria, not who is rated better. Acura may very well be rated very highly in key criteria, but very few people actually think of them at all. One is about fame and popularity, the other about prestige.

[Duncan]

acura needs to do a few couple things.

1- drop the prices some on the MDX and RDX.

2- bring back the prelude as an INTEGRA

3- RWD biased v6 and v8 LEGEND

4- convert the TSX into VIGOR

5- revive the NSX

6- move the S2000 over to Acura and redesign it.

learn about design.

keep up on powertrains.

stop being so japanese.

1- The RDX, maybe, as they apparently don't sell that well. The MDX does okay.

2- They tried that, but they called it an RSX instead and made it about 10 percent more expensive than it needed to be.

3- That idea comes up every two or three years, and has for the last decade or so. Still no progress there, apparently.

4- Name it for possibly Acura's least-impressive product ever? The one with the five-cylinder engine? Sorry, bad idea there.

5- YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES! That too has been in the works for a good five years - damn, Honda, get it on already!

6- Take the one Honda that anyone could actually lust for and make it invisible, you mean.

Learn about design - if you mean "expressive" design, then yes.

Keep up on powertrains - that's just ignorant, sorry. If Honda does one thing well, it's powertrains.

Stop being so Japanese - good luck with that. Kinda like asking Jeep to be less American.

[VenSeattle]

The first-gen TL (2nd gen Vigor) also had the Vigor's 5-cyl as its base engine = Acura 2.5TL

I actually liked the Vigor. Never cared for the TL much. Loved the Legend. Lost the feeling with RL. Enjoyed Integra. Forgot RSX.

sad... sad...

[regfootball]

1- The RDX, maybe, as they apparently don't sell that well. The MDX does okay.

2- They tried that, but they called it an RSX instead and made it about 10 percent more expensive than it needed to be.

3- That idea comes up every two or three years, and has for the last decade or so. Still no progress there, apparently.

4- Name it for possibly Acura's least-impressive product ever? The one with the five-cylinder engine? Sorry, bad idea there.

5- YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES! That too has been in the works for a good five years - damn, Honda, get it on already!

6- Take the one Honda that anyone could actually lust for and make it invisible, you mean.

Learn about design - if you mean "expressive" design, then yes.

Keep up on powertrains - that's just ignorant, sorry. If Honda does one thing well, it's powertrains.

Stop being so Japanese - good luck with that. Kinda like asking Jeep to be less American.

acura has no exceptional powertrains. no v8's. their turbos use fuel like escalades. the v6's are middle of the pack.

[siegen]

Acura's response is stupid. You don't bury your head in the sand and claim you are famous, really you are, when you get a result like this. A survey like this is only worthwhile as an internal reality check. They should be saying "this is terrible—how do we fix this before Honda-san starts sending out ceremonial swords?"

Acura's response is nothing out of the ordinary. What do you expect them to say? They are naturally working on it behind the scenes. They know where they are and where they want to be. We aren't talking about Toyota here, who are undoubtedly full of themselves at this point.

acura has no exceptional powertrains. no v8's. their turbos use fuel like escalades. the v6's are middle of the pack.

You DO understand there's more to a powertrain than just its peak power or torque output. The 11 year old SOHC J V6 still gets exceptional fuel economy while delivering equivalent power through the whole rev range, and doing so very smoothly and quietly. And it's inexpensive to produce compared to a DOHC V6.

Lack of V8's in production cars means they have no exceptional engines then. Or maybe they choose not to produce V8's (or V10's) for other reasons. Because they certainly don't have any problem producing some very

for non-production use. What's all the talk going around about Cadillac using more V6's and less V8's?

You're still whining about the RDX achieving high teens for mileage? Give it a break. It gets the same mileage as the AWD CX-7, while being considerably faster and packed with luxury features.

SH-AWD seems to go further though in actively proportioning torque to one side in order to actually steer the car through corners. Of course much the same effect could be achieved with the open-differential+traction-control system used by Cadillac, but with higher brake wear.

SH-AWD can bias torque between front and rear wheels, and transfer up to 70% of torque to one rear wheel. In addition, it can overdrive a rear wheel to increase rotation, which is not something a purely mechanical system could do.

[regfootball]

LOW TEENS. was it 12.9 or 13.9 that the RDX got for mileage? whatever it was, is was equal to what they got with the escalade in the same issue.

again

honda's v6 is now average, mid pack.

they have no v8's and are getting killed my Merc BMW etc.

their turbo 4's drink fuel like v10's

their NA 4's still lack torque and have to revved to the moon to get power.

Until Acura advances in powertrains they will be considered second tier.

[nferr]

Acura's a big seller around here. You see them all over the place in the Northeast.

[siegen]

LOW TEENS. was it 12.9 or 13.9 that the RDX got for mileage? whatever it was, is was equal to what they got with the escalade in the same issue.

again

honda's v6 is now average, mid pack.

they have no v8's and are getting killed my Merc BMW etc.

their turbo 4's drink fuel like v10's

their NA 4's still lack torque and have to revved to the moon to get power.

Until Acura advances in powertrains they will be considered second tier.

We've been over this before and you didn't learn. You have yourself said that auto journalists often achieve poor mileage because they're incredibly rough on the cars. If you read the RDX review (I have posted quotes from it before but won't waste my time now), they took the RDX onto mountain roads and were probably spending much of their time at WOT. If the RDX achieves 13mpg at full throttle then I'd say that's pretty good wouldn't you? How do you think they drove the Escalade? Do you think they drove it in a similar fashion? Not if they value their lives.

I'm going off of what real people have posted on fueleconomy.gov and what I've read on forums, and the RDX achieves high teens, even low 20's in real world normal use. That is normal for this vehicle, and is right inline with what the X3 and CX-7 get.

Honda's V6 engines achieve average peak performance, that is true. But like I said above, peak performance isn't all there is to an engine. And you know this, but refuse to concede any point for whatever reason.

How do Honda's 4cyl engines lack torque? Care to compare a 2.4L Honda 4cyl to a 2.4L 4cyl from any other manufacturer? They achieve equal or better torque given an equal comparison.

I don't care to track down dyno charts so here are really quick numbers:

Accord 2.4L

161TQ @ 4300rpm (177hp model)

162TQ @ 4400rpm (190hp model)

Malibu 2.4L

160TQ @ 4500rpm

G6 2.4L

156 TQ @ 5000rpm

CR-V 2.4L

161TQ @ 4200rpm

VUE 2.4L

161TQ @ 5100rpm

The only 2.4L's that made more torque @ GM required Premium fuel.

[Camino LS6]

I'll make one point and ask one question in this post and leave it at that.

Regardless of the merits of Acura's cars, they simply seem to be passe. I don't hear about them, I don't see them, I often forget about their existence. For Acura, I'd say that's a problem.

On to my question: I've never paid much attention to the brand so I have no idea how well they sell or what sort of market share they have. Anyone know?

[regfootball]

c'mon siegen. you know the buff book drove the Sclade as hard as the RDX and the RDX should be able to produce much better FE than it did. The two came out about equal which is scary since the sclade is like a ton more.

And to say it got as good an mpg as the fuel sucking CX-7 is not helping. Both of those vehicles are prime examples of how larger N/A fours or small v6's would be better powertrain applications. Neither vehicle has a user report history of matching the best mpg of the other CUV's / cute utes in its class, what is funny is that neither of them is also an acceleration king.

now if as you suggest it improves on FE with real world user reports than that is fine enough for me to lay off the sauce, but even then, there should not be such a wide spread between the FE in mild driving and wild driving. It leads me to think that Honda hasn't yet figured out how to squeeze upper tier power (-cough- and torque) and fuel economy out of a four cylinder at the same time. It leads me to think they have not optimized the fuel system or combustion chamber so as to achieve all benefits. In other words, they have yet ot achieve anything close to cutting edge, which again explains the second tier status.

turbo, something honda is a novice at. saab, audi, vw, bmw etc. all way ahead on that front. even chrysler's caliber SRT and chevy's HHR SS make you question Honda's turbo skills.

It should be fun to see Ford's ecoboost system put these Honda amateur turbos to shame when those come out.

Edited January 24, 2008 by regfootball

[siegen]

c'mon siegen. you know the buff book drove the Sclade as hard as the RDX and the RDX should be able to produce much better FE than it did. The two came out about equal which is scary since the sclade is like a ton more.

And to say it got as good an mpg as the fuel sucking CX-7 is not helping. Both of those vehicles are prime examples of how larger N/A fours or small v6's would be better powertrain applications. Neither vehicle has a user report history of matching the best mpg of the other CUV's / cute utes in its class, what is funny is that neither of them is also an acceleration king.

now if as you suggest it improves on FE with real world user reports than that is fine enough for me to lay off the sauce, but even then, there should not be such a wide spread between the FE in mild driving and wild driving. It leads me to think that Honda hasn't yet figured out how to squeeze upper tier power (-cough- and torque) and fuel economy out of a four cylinder at the same time. It leads me to think they have not optimized the fuel system or combustion chamber so as to achieve all benefits. In other words, they have yet ot achieve anything close to cutting edge, which again explains the second tier status.

turbo, something honda is a novice at. saab, audi, vw, bmw etc. all way ahead on that front. even chrysler's caliber SRT and chevy's HHR SS make you question Honda's turbo skills.

It should be fun to see Ford's ecoboost system put these Honda amateur turbos to shame when those come out.

So what exactly are you arguing? That the RDX must suck regardless of performance data because Honda has no production turbo experience? Or, a V6 would be preferable to a turbo-4 regardless of who built it? Because a turbo-6 in a large Explorer doesn't sound like it's going to be amazing or anything better than a V8. But then since it has a snazzy name like EcoBoost it must be awesome.

[regfootball]

if they RDX were faster and used less fuel, then it's turbo motor would be worth praise, yes.

I can forgive the average performance of the CX-7's powertrain, it's affordable.

The RDX is darned pricey for what you get. In that regard, the powertrain is a big flaw. If the RDX were 10 grand cheaper like the CX-7, it would likely merit a pass.

But that is just a microcosm of Acura as a whole. If they want to sell units at big boy prices, then what is under the hood needs to match the pricetag. A turbo four that drinks fuel and is bleh on acceleration adds no mojo to the brand. A TSX that sputters along adds no mojo to the brand. The TL moves out ok, but is hampered by its FWD only powertrain. The RL has a high hp rating but in its price class its acceleration numbers are merely so so.

They don't suck, they simply don't add up to good luxury buys. summation=second tier. They either need to drop the prices or add performance so the equation = buy.

[Z-06]

if they RDX were faster and used less fuel, then it's turbo motor would be worth praise, yes.

I can forgive the average performance of the CX-7's powertrain, it's affordable.

The RDX is darned pricey for what you get. In that regard, the powertrain is a big flaw. If the RDX were 10 grand cheaper like the CX-7, it would likely merit a pass.

But that is just a microcosm of Acura as a whole. If they want to sell units at big boy prices, then what is under the hood needs to match the pricetag. A turbo four that drinks fuel and is bleh on acceleration adds no mojo to the brand. A TSX that sputters along adds no mojo to the brand. The TL moves out ok, but is hampered by its FWD only powertrain. The RL has a high hp rating but in its price class its acceleration numbers are merely so so.

They don't suck, they simply don't add up to good luxury buys. summation=second tier. They either need to drop the prices or add performance so the equation = buy.

As much as I own an Acura TSX as my other vehicle. I agree with you on all the points. Although I do have to say this, Acura has done a good job in masking the dynamics of a FWD TL type S. In real world no buyer will see the FWD bias screwing the performance.

If you want to compete with the big boys, then go along with them. Acura lacks that. As such Acura lacks its brand identity. They first started as a company better than regular Honda yet affordable enough compared to the Luxos. Then they started getting the ricer and donkers in their Integras and RSXs which began hampering their image. Now they want to move upwards, but now lack some serious firepower. And powertrain is one of the issues.

[Cory Wolfe]

c'mon siegen. you know the buff book drove the Sclade as hard as the RDX and the RDX should be able to produce much better FE than it did. The two came out about equal which is scary since the sclade is like a ton more.

And to say it got as good an mpg as the fuel sucking CX-7 is not helping. Both of those vehicles are prime examples of how larger N/A fours or small v6's would be better powertrain applications. Neither vehicle has a user report history of matching the best mpg of the other CUV's / cute utes in its class, what is funny is that neither of them is also an acceleration king.

now if as you suggest it improves on FE with real world user reports than that is fine enough for me to lay off the sauce, but even then, there should not be such a wide spread between the FE in mild driving and wild driving. It leads me to think that Honda hasn't yet figured out how to squeeze upper tier power (-cough- and torque) and fuel economy out of a four cylinder at the same time. It leads me to think they have not optimized the fuel system or combustion chamber so as to achieve all benefits. In other words, they have yet ot achieve anything close to cutting edge, which again explains the second tier status.

turbo, something honda is a novice at. saab, audi, vw, bmw etc. all way ahead on that front. even chrysler's caliber SRT and chevy's HHR SS make you question Honda's turbo skills.

It should be fun to see Ford's ecoboost system put these Honda amateur turbos to shame when those come out.

Call me when you're ready to visit reality, okay?

[Camino LS6]

Call me when you're ready to visit reality, okay?

Viper Venom?

[regfootball]

nah, he just likes to poke and prod. he has a list of people he just replies to if he wants to get on their case and agitate them. notice how he doesn't add case arguments for or against anything. he just makes a provacative statement much the way an actor may enter the room, hoping to take the attention of the crowd for a moment. Now if per chance he were to offer any sort of reason why an Acura would be a compelling argument over any of its comeptition, or any sort of reason why Acura's sales have gone in the tank, he's more than welcome to. As it is, he wants to make a showing in thread, rip on some folks he don't like for whatever reason, and then disappear from the thread after a few personal jabs.

If he can explain the drop in the sales numbers of Acura's cars, I'd sure love to see it. It's pretty obvious that powertrains are one reason.

Edited January 25, 2008 by regfootball

[Cory Wolfe]

nah, he just likes to poke and prod.

It's what I do best, mind you.

[Camino LS6]

It's what I do best, mind you.

Sorry BV, I've been dyiing to use that line.

Couldn't resist. :AH-HA_wink:

[Z-06]

It's what I do best, mind you.

Have you not found anyone to poke and prod with is that why you chose reg?

[Camino LS6]

[siegen]

if they RDX were faster and used less fuel, then it's turbo motor would be worth praise, yes.

I can forgive the average performance of the CX-7's powertrain, it's affordable.

The RDX is darned pricey for what you get. In that regard, the powertrain is a big flaw. If the RDX were 10 grand cheaper like the CX-7, it would likely merit a pass.

But that is just a microcosm of Acura as a whole. If they want to sell units at big boy prices, then what is under the hood needs to match the pricetag. A turbo four that drinks fuel and is bleh on acceleration adds no mojo to the brand. A TSX that sputters along adds no mojo to the brand. The TL moves out ok, but is hampered by its FWD only powertrain. The RL has a high hp rating but in its price class its acceleration numbers are merely so so.

R&T tested the RDX at 6.3 second 0-60 and 14.8 second 1/4. About as fast as the 3.5L RAV4, but then the RDX will run circles around the RAV4 in the handling department. And more importantly, the RDX is faster than the BMW X3, which is its intended competition, not the RAV4 or CX-7. It also handles better despite the Michelin Pilots that Honda loves to put on all their vehicles.

If the RDX were 10 grand cheaper, you would just have a CR-V. The RDX has many luxury features and is a complete package. It is priced just right, but it fills a very small niche so it won't have as many buyers as the economy crossovers.

They don't suck, they simply don't add up to good luxury buys. summation=second tier. They either need to drop the prices or add performance so the equation = buy.

I think you're confusing a good buy with a purchase made mostly based on perception and image. The luxury features and quality of luxury features that you buy for the money presents an incredibly good value in any Acura. Using an older engine design and a cheaper drivetrain layout makes offering more features all the easier.

Unfortunately Acura will need to make some big strategy changes soon, as the formula that they've held to for over 20 years doesn't quite work anymore.

Edited January 25, 2008 by siegen

[Cory Wolfe]

Have you not found anyone to poke and prod with is that why you chose reg?

He's not alone... I like to share the love.

Edited January 25, 2008 by blackviper8891

[regfootball]

and its 5-60 time will be closer to 7 seconds.

they had to wind it up to get that time.

of course, the forester turbo will prob match that time for a lot less money.

C/D got 3 mpg less with its RDX than the X3. turbo economy?

Edited January 25, 2008 by regfootball

[siegen]

and its 5-60 time will be closer to 7 seconds.

they had to wind it up to get that time.

of course, the forester turbo will prob match that time for a lot less money.

C/D got 3 mpg less with its RDX than the X3. turbo economy?

Your point?

5-60 is less in the X3 as well.

Here are C&D's times, which are slower than R&T, but unfortunately R&T hasn't tested an X3.

RDX

0-60: 6.5s

5-60: 7.0s

X3

0-60: 7.0s

5-60: 7.5s

Luxury features add weight, and the RDX weighs a lot more than the Forester and likely much more than the new Forester as well. But just for the heck of it, here are C&D's times for the Forester:

Forester

0-60: 5.9s

5-60: 7.3s

Not surprising that it's faster, being 600 lbs lighter and lower profile. But that 5-60 time doesn't seem quite as impressive, maybe Subaru needs to work on their low-rpm turbo response.

Edited January 25, 2008 by siegen

[nferr]

Acura competes on price and dealer service. I've owned two, a Legend and a CL - they price their leases really aggressively. The cars are very sporty for everyday driving, not good for absolute performance due to the front wheel drive. They're big sellers here in the Northeast because of the FWD and because they come absolutely loaded standard. The only option on most models is navigation.

Thier bread and butter car, the TL is getting long in the tooth but a new one will be coming out next year so I'm sure they'll be getting press again. The new TSX is coming too.