09 ACURA RL

[siegen]

It is exceedingly hard to justify the RL at $46,000 when for the same price you can get the more exciting CTS with AWD, STS V8 or DTS with a better ride, the more prestigious 3 or 5 series BMWs, the better value holding Lexus GS, the safer S60 and S80, the more stylish A6, the substantially more powerful Chrysler 300c SRT-8, the more snobish C-class and E-class.

in fact, the only luxury car in this price range that is less relevant than the RL would be the Infiniti M-Class.

Acura generally includes most features standard on their cars, with only Navigation as an optional package. This makes comparisons difficult and leads to many people comparing base MSRP's and concluding that the RL is overpriced. For the RL, navigation, active head lights, adaptive cruise control, and automatic braking system are the only options, everything else is standard.

The STS with V8 starts at 53.5k without AWD, while the base STS with AWD and V6 starts right near the base RL. The base STS however lacks many features that you have to get the Lux package for. Compared to the V6 STS the RL is easily justified. The RL is closer in size to the CTS however, but the CTS is really stripped down and difficult to compare.

[Drew Dowdell]

The RL is closer in size to the CTS however, but the CTS is really stripped down and difficult to compare.

uh... what? 48k is a loaded CTS... 46k is pretty close.

[Lamar]

Acura generally includes most features standard on their cars, with only Navigation as an optional package. This makes comparisons difficult and leads to many people comparing base MSRP's and concluding that the RL is overpriced. For the RL, navigation, active head lights, adaptive cruise control, and automatic braking system are the only options, everything else is standard.

The STS with V8 starts at 53.5k without AWD, while the base STS with AWD and V6 starts right near the base RL. The base STS however lacks many features that you have to get the Lux package for. Compared to the V6 STS the RL is easily justified. The RL is closer in size to the CTS however, but the CTS is really stripped down and difficult to compare.

Good points.

With the way all its cars are built, Acura could really improve its position by focusing on Audi, another company whose platforms are all FWD/AWD. 4's and 6's being FWD, higher-powered engines AWD. Acura already has the standard-equipment edge on most everybody, and the interiors are still rather decent-looking.

Now, if only someone could sneak over and steal that ugly stick from Honda HQ, then they could once again get some decent-looking exteriors.

[Sixty8panther]

God damn that's ugly.

WOW, I thought the new Accord was going to be the poster child for Honda-fugly sedans but boy

was I wrong, this thing looks like it fell out of the ugly tree, hit every branch on the way down

and then got beaten by an ugly stick...

That pathetic, cramped, FWD-stupid driver's footwell is laughable.

Of the 523,917,448 things I hate about FWD the fact that the front wheel is 10" forward of where

my left leg would comfortably rest in a RWD car is one of the top-ten most annoying.

[siegen]

uh... what? 48k is a loaded CTS... 46k is pretty close.

What I mean is, it bases without many features. Heated seats, moon roof, and most luxury features are optional (part of the luxury packages). And Cadillac's website is really quite horrible at outlining what features are standard and what each package comes with and its price. The STS is a much more direct comparison, having the same MSRP with AWD.

[smk4565]

It is exceedingly hard to justify the RL at $46,000 when for the same price you can get the more exciting CTS with AWD, STS V8 or DTS with a better ride, the more prestigious 3 or 5 series BMWs, the better value holding Lexus GS, the safer S60 and S80, the more stylish A6, the substantially more powerful Chrysler 300c SRT-8, the more snobish C-class and E-class.

in fact, the only luxury car in this price range that is less relevant than the RL would be the Infiniti M-Class.

In 2006, the M45 was rated #1 by Car and Driver, with the 550i in 2nd. The M45 was always considered a good car, though not a strong seller.

The RL is equally justifiable as an STS. The STS is priced about the same, has a 300 hp V6 with AWD like the RL, and both have interiors that fall behind the Lexus and the Germans, and both are not that desirable, thus sell in low volume. The CTS for $48,000 gets you most of the same stuff as the RL, 300 hp V6 with AWD, just like the RL, the main difference being the CTS has the engine facing the proper direction and it looks better. Also the CTS starts at $33,000 so they can get volume at the low end, if the CTS had a base of $46,000 it would be a poor seller (like the STS is) although it would still outsell the ugly RL.

The DTS isn't cross shopped with any European car, and 275 hp V8 from 1994 that gets 17 mpg, pales in comparison to all the 300 hp V6s that get 20 mpg. The DTS is 16 inches longer than most mid-luxury cars, it doesn't even have a true competitor because it is a dinosaur, just as the Town Car is. The decision is buy a DTS/Town Car or go for a ES350, Avalon or Lucerne and save $8-10,000.

[smk4565]

The AWD Audis have longitudinally mounted engines though, which gives them an advantage over the transverse mount set up used by Lincoln, Acura and Volvo. The Audis have a better weight balance, less body roll and better grip than any of those cars. However, my mom has an Audi, the interior leaves much to be desired, and the road/wind noise is horrible, and the engine is loud and vibrates a lot. It's a bad car.

[smk4565]

"While the 2009 Acura RL just showed up on the map at the Chicago Auto Show, Best Car is already speculating on the next-generation RL.

The magazine says that Acura may be looking to offer a 4.5 liter V8 engine that produces in the excess of 400 horsepower. The next-generation RL is also rumored to have a new rear-wheel-drive architecture. Best Car speculates that the car will arrive in Japan in 2010 and believes it is what Acura needs to go head-to-head with Lexus.

Recently reported, Acura is working on a “huge shift” next year that will move the brand closer to tier 1 luxury brands such as BMW, Mercedes-Benz and Lexus." (www.egmcartech.com)

So if they do that, the RL at least will have the hardware, styling and reputation will be factors in going after Lexus and the Germans. Their 400+ hp V8 will be much better than the 300 hp V6 Cadillac will have for the CTS and future DTS/STS/DTZ (or whatever it is called). Cadillac is slipping, they need way more in their arsenal than what they have.

Edited February 27, 2008 by smk4565

[Lamar]

The AWD Audis have longitudinally mounted engines though, which gives them an advantage over the transverse mount set up used by Lincoln, Acura and Volvo. The Audis have a better weight balance, less body roll and better grip than any of those cars. However, my mom has an Audi, the interior leaves much to be desired, and the road/wind noise is horrible, and the engine is loud and vibrates a lot. It's a bad car.

I don't disagree with you about mounting the engines longitudinally.

Which Audi does your mother have, and what year?

[smk4565]

I don't disagree with you about mounting the engines longitudinally.

Which Audi does your mother have, and what year?

2007 A4 with the 2.0 turbo. The engine vibrates and is too noisy, at a stoplight you actually feel your seat vibrate. The only thing I like about the car is the all wheel drive system grips well and gives it a very solid feeling, even on slippery country roads, it allows the driver to be aggressive with no worries. However the handling isn't BMW level and the ride is too jarring.

[Dsuupr]

"While the 2009 Acura RL just showed up on the map at the Chicago Auto Show, Best Car is already speculating on the next-generation RL.

The magazine says that Acura may be looking to offer a 4.5 liter V8 engine that produces in the excess of 400 horsepower. The next-generation RL is also rumored to have a new rear-wheel-drive architecture. Best Car speculates that the car will arrive in Japan in 2010 and believes it is what Acura needs to go head-to-head with Lexus.

With the new CAFE standards . . . I doubt it.

[Drew Dowdell]

In 2006, the M45 was rated #1 by Car and Driver, with the 550i in 2nd. The M45 was always considered a good car, though not a strong seller.

The RL is equally justifiable as an STS. The STS is priced about the same, has a 300 hp V6 with AWD like the RL, and both have interiors that fall behind the Lexus and the Germans, and both are not that desirable, thus sell in low volume. The CTS for $48,000 gets you most of the same stuff as the RL, 300 hp V6 with AWD, just like the RL, the main difference being the CTS has the engine facing the proper direction and it looks better. Also the CTS starts at $33,000 so they can get volume at the low end, if the CTS had a base of $46,000 it would be a poor seller (like the STS is) although it would still outsell the ugly RL.

The DTS isn't cross shopped with any European car, and 275 hp V8 from 1994 that gets 17 mpg, pales in comparison to all the 300 hp V6s that get 20 mpg. The DTS is 16 inches longer than most mid-luxury cars, it doesn't even have a true competitor because it is a dinosaur, just as the Town Car is. The decision is buy a DTS/Town Car or go for a ES350, Avalon or Lucerne and save $8-10,000.

You drive a Northstar. You know there is more to that engine than the numbers indicate. I brought up the DTS because if you're going to spend 46k and want a nice compliant ride, you can't get much plusher than the DTS. Not everyone wants to be carving up canyon roads or drag racing in their luxury car. The fact that the DTS still outsells the DTS retail is proof of that.

The STS could be better. The outside is very attractive with the update.... now if they had only but a CTS styled interior in it and only sold the extended wheelbase model sold in China it would sell better. As it is, even in it's damaged state, Cadillac still has more prestige at this dollar level than Acura.

The difference here is that Cadillac could sell the STS with it's current formula plus a few tweaks. Acura is going to have to completely re-write the RL if they want to play here. Acura has never played here.... Cadillac has.. and they just need to get their mojo back.

[Drew Dowdell]

"While the 2009 Acura RL just showed up on the map at the Chicago Auto Show, Best Car is already speculating on the next-generation RL.

The magazine says that Acura may be looking to offer a 4.5 liter V8 engine that produces in the excess of 400 horsepower. The next-generation RL is also rumored to have a new rear-wheel-drive architecture. Best Car speculates that the car will arrive in Japan in 2010 and believes it is what Acura needs to go head-to-head with Lexus.

Recently reported, Acura is working on a “huge shift” next year that will move the brand closer to tier 1 luxury brands such as BMW, Mercedes-Benz and Lexus." (www.egmcartech.com)

So if they do that, the RL at least will have the hardware, styling and reputation will be factors in going after Lexus and the Germans. Their 400+ hp V8 will be much better than the 300 hp V6 Cadillac will have for the CTS and future DTS/STS/DTZ (or whatever it is called). Cadillac is slipping, they need way more in their arsenal than what they have.

Lets play "Name the unwarranted assumptions"!

1. you assume a new RL will be the same price as the current one.

2. you assume a new RL will have a 400+ hp V8 as the base engine.

3. you assume that Cadillac is standing still.... remember, the HF engines were designed with turbocharging in mind and their displacement can be increased to almost 4 litres.

[smk4565]

With the new CAFE standards . . . I doubt it.

Honda is currently the most fuel efficient brand (according to EPA 2007). By 2020, they'll have more hybrids or diesels, perhaps a fuel cell. CAFE standards won't be that hard for them to meet, building 20,000 V8s that get 18-19 mpg won't hurt them. BMW, Mercedes, and Honda/Acura don't have 15 mpg pickups and Hummers, so they can make a V8 luxury car. If Acura doesn't do a V8 (or an NSX), CAFE won't be the reason, it will be based on projected sales and development costs.

[smk4565]

Lets play "Name the unwarranted assumptions"!

1. you assume a new RL will be the same price as the current one.

2. you assume a new RL will have a 400+ hp V8 as the base engine.

3. you assume that Cadillac is standing still.... remember, the HF engines were designed with turbocharging in mind and their displacement can be increased to almost 4 litres.

I am not assuming the V8 would be standard, I was just reposting the news item. The V6 will no doubt be standard, and V8 optional, just like everyone else does. A V6 doesn't produce torque like a V8, and it doesn't sound like one either. A twin turbo V6 would be nice, but when the 5-series (X6, X5, 7-series too) has a twin-turbo V8 they have a decisive advantage.

Cadillac needs a sedan that competes with the mid-level cars, they don't have it. The CTS is entry level, the STS is too big and too cheap, the DTS is a dinosaur, and both will be dead in 2010-2011. A dressed up G8 isn't the answer either.

[Drew Dowdell]

Honda is currently the most fuel efficient brand (according to EPA 2007). By 2020, they'll have more hybrids or diesels, perhaps a fuel cell. CAFE standards won't be that hard for them to meet, building 20,000 V8s that get 18-19 mpg won't hurt them. BMW, Mercedes, and Honda/Acura don't have 15 mpg pickups and Hummers, so they can make a V8 luxury car. If Acura doesn't do a V8 (or an NSX), CAFE won't be the reason, it will be based on projected sales and development costs.

No, BMW just has 15mpg M3s, M5s, X5s, 6-series, and 7-series..... 16mpg X3s...... and they pay the CAFE fine every year.

I would imagine Acura has CAFE credits much like GM does.

[Drew Dowdell]

I am not assuming the V8 would be standard, I was just reposting the news item. The V6 will no doubt be standard, and V8 optional, just like everyone else does. A V6 doesn't produce torque like a V8, and it doesn't sound like one either. A twin turbo V6 would be nice, but when the 5-series (X6, X5, 7-series too) has a twin-turbo V8 they have a decisive advantage.

Cadillac needs a sedan that competes with the mid-level cars, they don't have it. The CTS is entry level, the STS is too big and too cheap, the DTS is a dinosaur, and both will be dead in 2010-2011. A dressed up G8 isn't the answer either.

I really question if BMW will be able to continue to offer V8s or Twin Turbo V8s in the time frame we're referring to.. at the very least not without charging substantially more in order to cover the CAFE fine.

6 cylinders are going to become the new standard in luxury cars with 8s and 12s available only in the 100k+ plus price range.

[smk4565]

No, BMW just has 15mpg M3s, M5s, X5s, 6-series, and 7-series..... 16mpg X3s...... and they pay the CAFE fine every year.

I would imagine Acura has CAFE credits much like GM does.

The Silverado sales volume is much higher than the 7-series, and M cars. The X3 is rated by the EPA at 20 mpg combined, same as a Malibu V6. BMW isn't great at fuel economy, but they do have diesel and hybrids coming, the 335d goes on sale this summer and averages 28 mpg. Time will tell with their hybrids and whether or not they do the 42 mpg X5 concept.

The whole Acura brand averages out to the same mileage the CTS gets. Acura could afford to make a V8 car under CAFE guidelines, especially with how fuel efficient Honda is. My main point is GM is truck and SUV heavy, so to make up for that they have to build only 4 and 6 cylinder cars. The Germans and Honda/Acura are car heavy, so they can make V8s, and even V12 sedans.

[smk4565]

I really question if BMW will be able to continue to offer V8s or Twin Turbo V8s in the time frame we're referring to.. at the very least not without charging substantially more in order to cover the CAFE fine.

6 cylinders are going to become the new standard in luxury cars with 8s and 12s available only in the 100k+ plus price range.

For 2009-2015 they will surely use the twin turbo V8. As 2020 approaches that could change. But the new BMW V8 is only 4.4 liter and said to get 19 mpg, that is pretty good mileage for a 410 hp, 450 lb-ft engine. The 5-series is also getting an 8-speed automatic, more aluminum in the chassis to reduce weight, plus a light hybrid system like the Malibu has. They could get the V8 to average 20-21 mpg, just as a Malibu V6 does. Even BMW's V12 which is rather dated at this point gets 15 mpg, that is better than the Escalade. Is GM going to stop making Hummers, Escalades and Suburbans, they all get worse mileage than a 7-series or S550.

BMW and Mercedes will never stop making V8s and V12s. They charge a lot now and people pay it. People will always pay a premium for status, image and technology. Once their diesel hybrids roll out over the next few years, and Mercedes has SMART car sales helping their CAFE numbers, both those brans will be fine.

6 cylinder may be the standard in the $30-45,000 entry level cars, but how do you get people to pay $60,000 for a car with the same engine that is in an Accord, Camry or Malibu. Diesel engines will be used in the entry lux class to deliver great fuel economy which will help set the car apart from the family sedans. Example: Audi today showed a TT diesel that gets 43 mpg US, and 0-60 in 7.5 seconds. Not the fastest car, but that is near Prius level gas mileage.

[Drew Dowdell]

The Silverado sales volume is much higher than the 7-series, and M cars. The X3 is rated by the EPA at 20 mpg combined, same as a Malibu V6. BMW isn't great at fuel economy, but they do have diesel and hybrids coming, the 335d goes on sale this summer and averages 28 mpg. Time will tell with their hybrids and whether or not they do the 42 mpg X5 concept.

The whole Acura brand averages out to the same mileage the CTS gets. Acura could afford to make a V8 car under CAFE guidelines, especially with how fuel efficient Honda is. My main point is GM is truck and SUV heavy, so to make up for that they have to build only 4 and 6 cylinder cars. The Germans and Honda/Acura are car heavy, so they can make V8s, and even V12 sedans.

1. Volume doesn't matter, percentage of fleet does.

2. EPA ratings mean squat to CAFE. CAFE has it's own rating system.

3. Cars and light trucks are currently considered separately... meaning a Silverado would not get canceled out by a hybrid CTS.

4. The Germans don't care about CAFE, they just pay the fine and charge you more for the vehicle. I'm not opposed to Cadillac doing the same thing.

[Drew Dowdell]

For 2009-2015 they will surely use the twin turbo V8. As 2020 approaches that could change. But the new BMW V8 is only 4.4 liter and said to get 19 mpg, that is pretty good mileage for a 410 hp, 450 lb-ft engine. The 5-series is also getting an 8-speed automatic, more aluminum in the chassis to reduce weight, plus a light hybrid system like the Malibu has. They could get the V8 to average 20-21 mpg, just as a Malibu V6 does. Even BMW's V12 which is rather dated at this point gets 15 mpg, that is better than the Escalade. Is GM going to stop making Hummers, Escalades and Suburbans, they all get worse mileage than a 7-series or S550.

BMW and Mercedes will never stop making V8s and V12s. They charge a lot now and people pay it. People will always pay a premium for status, image and technology. Once their diesel hybrids roll out over the next few years, and Mercedes has SMART car sales helping their CAFE numbers, both those brans will be fine.

6 cylinder may be the standard in the $30-45,000 entry level cars, but how do you get people to pay $60,000 for a car with the same engine that is in an Accord, Camry or Malibu. Diesel engines will be used in the entry lux class to deliver great fuel economy which will help set the car apart from the family sedans. Example: Audi today showed a TT diesel that gets 43 mpg US, and 0-60 in 7.5 seconds. Not the fastest car, but that is near Prius level gas mileage.

I'm going to enroll you in a Logic and Debate classes at CMU.

Please explain why you think it is logical to compare fuel economy of a V12 in a sedan to the fuel economy of a V8 in a full sized SUV. The 6.0 litre V8 in the Corvette gets better fuel economy than the V12 in the 7-series.... 'splain that logic Lucy! In short, put the BMW V12 in something the size, shape, and weight of an Escalade and see where it's fuel economy heads.

I would fully expect that Cadillac would throw additional technology at the HF-series engines to make them able to compete in the $60,000 price class. If BMW and Benz continue to build V8s and V12s expect their price to rise substantially. E550s could easily push up into the high 70s base price just to pay the CAFE fine.

Why do you not acknowledge that GM has 2 new diesels and the 2-mode hybrid coming? Why do you cite BMW's future products without also citing GM's? You claim to be a GM fan, yet your German car humping is pornographic.

Edit: Oh look... pricing released for the X6: BMW X6 xDrive 50i - $63,000 base.

[Dsuupr]

Honda is currently the most fuel efficient brand (according to EPA 2007). By 2020, they'll have more hybrids or diesels, perhaps a fuel cell. CAFE standards won't be that hard for them to meet, building 20,000 V8s that get 18-19 mpg won't hurt them. BMW, Mercedes, and Honda/Acura don't have 15 mpg pickups and Hummers, so they can make a V8 luxury car. If Acura doesn't do a V8 (or an NSX), CAFE won't be the reason, it will be based on projected sales and development costs.

Huh?

EPA ratings

Tahoe 4x4 with 5.3 V8 - 14/19

BMW X5 4.8 - 14/19

Mercedes ML550 - 13/18

honda pilot - 15/20

Silverado 4x4 with 5.3 V8 - 14/19

honda ridgeline - 15/20

STS V-8 - 15/24

DTS V-8 - 15/23

BMW 550i - 15/23

BMW 760il - 13/20

acura rl - 16/24 (6-cyl engine)

Mercedes E550 - 15/22

Mercedes S600 - 11/17

Yeah I forgot how great of gas mileage they get. You get 1 mpg better for a truck or SUV that is 1/2 the size.

Next time you might want to check the facts before you throw flames.

I do understand that they use collective EPA figures, which I think is a load of crap. honda will use their credits for as long as they can get away with it because they build such low gas mileage vehicles, besides their small 4-cyl products.

Edited February 27, 2008 by Dsuupr

[smk4565]

1. Volume doesn't matter, percentage of fleet does.

2. EPA ratings mean squat to CAFE. CAFE has it's own rating system.

3. Cars and light trucks are currently considered separately... meaning a Silverado would not get canceled out by a hybrid CTS.

4. The Germans don't care about CAFE, they just pay the fine and charge you more for the vehicle. I'm not opposed to Cadillac doing the same thing.

I agree with point 4. If Cadillac has a diesel and/or hybrid car on every model, their fuel economy will be good. They should do a DOHC V8 with the same hybrid system the Malibu has, that would get 20 mpg. The Germans seem to be going to diesel and hybrid diesel to get gas thrifty buyers, Cadillac should too.

I know CAFE separates cars and trucks now, but I though the 2020 standard was going to put them all together.

[smk4565]

I'm going to enroll you in a Logic and Debate classes at CMU.

Please explain why you think it is logical to compare fuel economy of a V12 in a sedan to the fuel economy of a V8 in a full sized SUV. The 6.0 litre V8 in the Corvette gets better fuel economy than the V12 in the 7-series.... 'splain that logic Lucy! In short, put the BMW V12 in something the size, shape, and weight of an Escalade and see where it's fuel economy heads.

I would fully expect that Cadillac would throw additional technology at the HF-series engines to make them able to compete in the $60,000 price class. If BMW and Benz continue to build V8s and V12s expect their price to rise substantially. E550s could easily push up into the high 70s base price just to pay the CAFE fine.

Why do you not acknowledge that GM has 2 new diesels and the 2-mode hybrid coming? Why do you cite BMW's future products without also citing GM's? You claim to be a GM fan, yet your German car humping is pornographic.

Edit: Oh look... pricing released for the X6: BMW X6 xDrive 50i - $63,000 base.

I am only stating that if in 2020 all vehicles truck and car have to average out to 35 mpg CAFE, then GM with half trucks has to make really gas friendly cars to compensate. BMW, Honda, M-B, that have a high percentage of cars can make some cars that get poor mileage.

M-B is going to get help on CAFE with the 41 mpg SMART For2. The X5 Efficient Dynamics gets over 10 mpg more than an Aveo. Products like that can compensate for the V8 and V12s without having to raise price to cover a fine.

Personally I think a coupe like SUV (infiniti EX or X6) is dumb, but I am sure some people will buy it to be different. BMW will get the $63,000 because it has a wicked engine (0-60 in 5.3 seconds) and because it's a BMW. I wish Cadillac had products like the CLS or XF or S-class and they operated in the $60,000+ range. Cadillac was once the standard of the world, now they are just another player in the entry-lux segment.

[regfootball]

so acura will turn pansy and seek to conform to the rest of the market entries? so much for honda and its 'more with less' philosophy.

[Drew Dowdell]

$63,000 for a great handling AMC Concord?

MB will get help from SMART... but they're only expecting 30k-40k in sales from that division. M-B will need a LOT more than that to cover the upper end of their range.

Cadillac should NOT get the hybrid system the Malibu has. It should get the 2-mode hybrid system the Vue is getting..... but then you'll be in here tapdancing around the 4-speed in the 2-mode while ignoring the two electric CVTs that are also included and whining about how BMW has a 12speed for only $50,000 more.

[siegen]

Tahoe 4x4 with 5.3 V8 - 14/19

honda pilot - 15/20

The EPA ratings are close, however the Pilot averages 2-3 mpg better in real world driving. Is that 2-3 mpg worth driving a bit smaller vehicle with less grunt? For some it is, for some it isn't.

Silverado 4x4 with 5.3 V8 - 14/19

honda ridgeline - 15/20

The Silverado 4wd might average better mileage in real world conditions. Comparing the Ridgeline to the Avalanche is about the same story as the Pilot however, about 2 mpg better but less grunt. If you're going to be doing any considerable towing (a boat for example), the Tahoe or Avalanche would be a more wise decision.

STS V-8 - 15/24

DTS V-8 - 15/23

BMW 550i - 15/23

BMW 760il - 13/20

acura rl - 16/24 (6-cyl engine)

Mercedes E550 - 15/22

Mercedes S600 - 11/17

The RL's EPA ratings suck. For example, the BMW 535xi, which is most comparable BMW to the RL (similar output, size, although it has better gearbox choices and is more expensive), and is rated to 17/25 with auto. The STS V-6 AWD is rated to 17/26! Clearly beating the RL. The RL, from owner testimony and fueleconomy.gov, exceeds its combined rating by 2-3mpg regularly. Does mileage really matter on luxury vehicles?

[regfootball]

mileage matters when the parent company is self professed eco friendly.

Pilots don't get good mpg. Two friends have em, and they both said mileage is in the 16+/- range when they got em. lambdas = that or better. my buddies avalanche, he gets 17.

[The O.C.]

2007 A4 with the 2.0 turbo. The engine vibrates and is too noisy, at a stoplight you actually feel your seat vibrate. The only thing I like about the car is the all wheel drive system grips well and gives it a very solid feeling, even on slippery country roads, it allows the driver to be aggressive with no worries. However the handling isn't BMW level and the ride is too jarring.

There's something wrong with your Mom's car.

I just got back my '07 A4 2.0T from my ex....and the engine is nearly as smooth as the 3.6L in my CTS....and a damn bit quieter on full-throttle acceleration. As far as the ride....I have the top S-line package with 18-inch wheels and sport suspension and the car rides like a dream. It's more firmly damped than the Caddy, but rides over bumps just as well.

The 2.0T is one of the smoothest, best 4cyls I've ever driven.....I've probably been in 3-4 different ones (including mine) and they've all be very smooth.....and very quiet.....

[The O.C.]

mileage matters when the parent company is self professed eco friendly.

Pilots don't get good mpg. Two friends have em, and they both said mileage is in the 16+/- range when they got em. lambdas = that or better. my buddies avalanche, he gets 17.

Not to rag on the Lambdas....but they are gas hogs extraordinaire.......I had an Enclave as a rental and averaged only 14mpg in mixed driving while I had it.....

[Robert Hall]

Not to rag on the Lambdas....but they are gas hogs extraordinaire.......I had an Enclave as a rental and averaged only 14mpg in mixed driving while I had it.....

That's sad...I would have thought they would have done better than the Tahoe, etc...but they are almost as heavy but with smaller engines..

[smk4565]

$63,000 for a great handling AMC Concord?

MB will get help from SMART... but they're only expecting 30k-40k in sales from that division. M-B will need a LOT more than that to cover the upper end of their range.

Cadillac should NOT get the hybrid system the Malibu has. It should get the 2-mode hybrid system the Vue is getting..... but then you'll be in here tapdancing around the 4-speed in the 2-mode while ignoring the two electric CVTs that are also included and whining about how BMW has a 12speed for only $50,000 more.

$63,000 for more torque than a Corvette or XLR-V, 4 years free maintenance and great handling.

The S-class is only about 25,000 US sales per year, SMART can offset that and the E55 and CLS55 AMG. The S400 hybrid is said to get 40 mpg, the GL320 beats a Tahoe hybrid in mileage, Mercedes could end up making a lot of fuel efficient cars.

Cadillac shouldn't have 4-speeds or pushrods in any product. BMW and Mercedes design cars to be leaders in technology, materials and performance. Cadillac vehicles are designed to utilize existing GM parts, while squeezing every penny of cost out of it so they can price it lower than the import. Their philosophies are different, thus their image is different, and M-B and BMW can charge what they do.

[The O.C.]

That's sad...I would have thought they would have done better than the Tahoe, etc...but they are almost as heavy but with smaller engines..

Yeah....it didn't surprise me.....

The 3.6L in my CTS gets only 17-19mpg in mixed driving.....it's a fine engine....but hook it up to a 5,000lb SUV and I don't care how many gears are in the tranny....it's gonna suck gas.....

I've noticed there's a HUGE difference between EPA ratings and real-world mileage. It's pretty pointless to have a debate on here discussing EPA ratings among competitive cars....

[Robert Hall]

I've noticed there's a HUGE difference between EPA ratings and real-world mileage. It's pretty pointless to have a debate on here discussing EPA ratings among competitive cars....

Definitely..it's been that way as I long as I can remember, IIRC my Jeep 4.0L is rated at 17/21, but I've never seen 21, let alone 19 hwy..

[Lamar]

Not to rag on the Lambdas....but they are gas hogs extraordinaire.......I had an Enclave as a rental and averaged only 14mpg in mixed driving while I had it.....

Was the engine broken in yet?

[Drew Dowdell]

Not to rag on the Lambdas....but they are gas hogs extraordinaire.......I had an Enclave as a rental and averaged only 14mpg in mixed driving while I had it.....

Not to rag on your driving, but you get 18mpg highway in a CTS 6-speed.

[The O.C.]

Not to rag on your driving, but you get 18mpg highway in a CTS 6-speed.

We've chatted about this a bunch.....

.....and I think it's wierd. My average over 33K miles is between 17-19mpg in mixed driving. And I don't beat the thing to death.

Like I said...I HAS to be down to the gearing of the 6-speed manual as opposed to the excellent 5-speed auto. My C6 average was about 22mpg in the same driving. But whatever the reason, I'd still buy another one....it just isn't as good as I thought it would be.

As far as the Lambdas, yeah it did suck....and it had miles on it....but I don't care. I don't look at any full-size crossover or SUV and expect wonderful gas mileage. Other than the $h!ty mileage, the Enclave with the 3.6L engine was a slick piece....no beans about it.....

[regfootball]

my boss at work says he gets 18-19 in his acadia. so 'your results will vary'. i considered his number solid as fuel economy.gov seems to have sim. figures in some cases.

i don't get what people's mileage expectations are. some folks are simply unrealistic in what they expect. i have owned about 6 midsize cars with various engines and trannies and all seem to hit right about at 20 mpg city with the way i drive. the highway mpg is what varies more with engine type. my 89 SHO/stick would be upper 20's consistently on the highway but 20 in town. my 95 tbird v8 was always around 20. my 99 v8 sho was almost always at 20 except occasional 25 on a trip. my 500 is 20 consistently, although i did flirt with 30 on a return trip last fall. the aztek, 20 all the time. my diamantes, 20-21 consistently.

20 is my benchline for the size of car i want. if i want a bigger car i figure i will get less than 20. if i had a compact car i would expect high 20's with mid 30's on trips.

no duh a crossover that weights 500-1000 pounds more is going to get mid high teens.

what people rarely talk about is how many of these small 4 cylinder vehicles that are like crossovers and such that weigh in the 3400+ range and they struggle to get much better than 20. so to me even several 4 cylinders people seem to buy to save gas, they simply don't in.

one vehicle that got good mpg for a crossover was the freestyle with its cvt. people would get 22-23 city and high twenties to low 30's on trips. for a 7 seater, that's not bad.

Edited February 28, 2008 by regfootball

[siegen]

i don't get what people's mileage expectations are. some folks are simply unrealistic in what they expect.

Unrealistic like expecting an SUV that does 0-60 in 6.3 seconds to get amazing 20+ MPG? :AH-HA_wink:

[FAPTurbo]

15 pages relating to one of the world's most 'boringest' sedans evar?

[Drew Dowdell]

15 pages relating to one of the world's most 'boringest' sedans evar?

more posts than sales....

[The O.C.]

more posts than sales....

The RL is so boring......we haven't even posted about it in this thread for....how many posts?

LOL

[Lamar]

The RL is so boring......we haven't even posted about it in this thread for....how many posts?

LOL

17 or 18. :AH-HA_wink:

[siegen]

Which is why this thread deserves the award for the most off-topic thread ever.

Consequently, this is probably the most marketing Honda has ever done or received for the RL... and it was inadvertent!

[Drew Dowdell]

Which is why this thread deserves the award for the most off-topic thread ever.

Consequently, this is probably the most marketing Honda has ever done or received for the RL... and it was inadvertent!

so... I should make this thread unsearchable by Google unless Acura pays me one meeeeeellion dollars! *pinky finger to mouth* muahahahahahahaah mmuahahahahahah

[Intrepidation]

Which is why this thread deserves the award for the most off-topic thread ever.

Consequently, this is probably the most marketing Honda has ever done or received for the RL... and it was inadvertent!

If you want an RL, buy a CTS.

[Polish_Kris]

If you want an RL, buy a CTS.

Now THAT is off topic!

[Intrepidation]

Now THAT is off topic!

I know

[A Horse With No Name]

but on what basis? Would you have been looking for a super fuel efficient commuter or the most car for your dollar. A loaded Delta 88 had nearly every wiz bang feature GM could throw at it and it was the same price as a loaded Accord. With the Delta, you got more features, more comforts, great reliability and longevity, and more safety....

but if you were after gas mileage... then yea, I could see how you'd prefer an 87 horsepower tin can.

The Accord that year came with a V6 IIRC. My father had one about that era and actually traded a Delta 88 in on it...I can't remember if he bought the Honda right before or right after Kim and I got married, and we got married in 1988.

The Accord was a much better handeling car. One of the things that is drawing me back to GM is that they are paying more attention to building cars that like to turn. The Cobalt SS won SSC at the runoffs with Heinricy at the wheel(beating the Honda Civic SI and several other asian cars), the CTS loves to turn, the Solstice/sky twins love to turn, haven't driven one yet but want to see what the new Malibu does...

For me I want a car with "catlike" reflexes. Oldsmoboi, were you to be given a choice of your ultimate current car my guess is you'd buy a CTS or some other really loaded car. Were money not an option I would take a Lutus Elise. We all have different choices. The Honda of the Era did drive/handle MUCH better than the Olds.

If we are talking about the great reliability of 80's products, no one was perfect but Dad's Olds was the car that turned him off to American cars. My father is a big time Democrat and a big time "buy American" type of guy, but after that olds he's owned two Hondas and a Toyota.

All of this being said...I dated my wife driving an Olds Cutlass similar to Black Vipers car, and we Honeymooned with the Cavalier that replaced the Olds. Part of me really, really, really wants another Olds. Just can't afford one right now.

Chris

[A Horse With No Name]

my boss at work says he gets 18-19 in his acadia. so 'your results will vary'. i considered his number solid as fuel economy.gov seems to have sim. figures in some cases.

i don't get what people's mileage expectations are. some folks are simply unrealistic in what they expect. i have owned about 6 midsize cars with various engines and trannies and all seem to hit right about at 20 mpg city with the way i drive. the highway mpg is what varies more with engine type. my 89 SHO/stick would be upper 20's consistently on the highway but 20 in town. my 95 tbird v8 was always around 20. my 99 v8 sho was almost always at 20 except occasional 25 on a trip. my 500 is 20 consistently, although i did flirt with 30 on a return trip last fall. the aztek, 20 all the time. my diamantes, 20-21 consistently.

20 is my benchline for the size of car i want. if i want a bigger car i figure i will get less than 20. if i had a compact car i would expect high 20's with mid 30's on trips.

no duh a crossover that weights 500-1000 pounds more is going to get mid high teens.

what people rarely talk about is how many of these small 4 cylinder vehicles that are like crossovers and such that weigh in the 3400+ range and they struggle to get much better than 20. so to me even several 4 cylinders people seem to buy to save gas, they simply don't in.

one vehicle that got good mpg for a crossover was the freestyle with its cvt. people would get 22-23 city and high twenties to low 30's on trips. for a 7 seater, that's not bad.

Real world 30 is baseline for cars I want...

But my Chrysler Concorde did an Amazing 26-29, usually got about 28. Mostly semi rural driving, but still pretty good for a midsized car.

My Safari van eats fuel like an aircraft carrier, however. I have to use a tape measure and a calculator to get actual fuel economy.

Chris