Yes, the Q has been discontinued, as I stated in my initial post. I suggested that it might be a good idea for Acura to do the same in regards to the RL. But that's about as much as this thread has to do with the Q. For you to bring up (yet again) that "the Q has been a failure for 18 years" is completely 100% irrelevant to this thread. Again, this thread is not about the Q, it is about the RL. Feel free to start a new thread on the Q, so you can attack it more in your own thread. But keep your negative opinions about Infiniti and the Q out of my thread please.


And I strongly suggest that you think about how you come across to other members of this board. You rarely ever follow your own suggestions (i.e baiting, going off topic, attacking and offending other members, etc.), so you're not one to talk.

Good, please do so.

 

I find the lack of RWD far more important than a longitudinal engine layout.

 

It is pretty bad that when i see the new 4 door accord from its side profile, it reminds me of an RL and a TL. That character line that it has makes them look too similar. Good for the accord but not for the RL

 

The fact is that the RL/Legend has been a success, but is middling to failure now. The Q45 was never a success for 18 years, which is why it was cancelled. And, as others pointed out, they have the M35/45 to take up the slack, while Acura doesn't. The RL/Legend had a chance and that is why it should continue, to return to that success. Besides, at 200,000/yr sales, Acura is doing pretty good for the #2 Japanese luxury make, and needs a flagship to bolster that.

 

Good for extra power loss. 22% according to roomate with a '95 Legend 4 speed auto.

 

make an acura that can compete with the ls a big body v8/v10 luxury sedan with all the options that the merc, bmc and lexus has, until then i will always consider an acura a tarted honda , as much as i love acuras, they havent been able to differenciate themselves from honda in the same way lexus has from toyota. also, the q45 was a good car, but not good enough to be in the leagues with the s class ls and 7 series, but a blackon black 2001 q45 would look very nice in my driveway lol

 

Man...... If you don't sh__ the f__ ..... lol..(mods, I am only joking)

Here I am at work trying to get my read on and every other posts is arguing....relaaaaaxxxxxxxxx

Its a good point of discussion as the RL is a very good car that does so many things well but yet seems to be a "DUD"...
I personally love the RL when in the drivers seat, otherwise it is unimpressive. My brother owned one before the 07 S5 benz. The odd thing is he is thinking about purchasing another RL as a winter beater..lol (must be nice)

 

Q's can be had for very cheap since they're discontinued and sitting on lots still and that they aren't in demand. I think someone told me you can get one for half than sticker.

 

I do recall that when the new M45 came out, a number of reviews questioned why you would purchase a Q45. I don't know how much more luxurious the Q was--it certainly, IMO, was less attractive.

The RL was never any better than "excutive" class. I used to have a 2000 TL--I never understood why anyone would get the prior gen RL over a TL--the RL wasn't any bigger, had (until they upgraded), a weaker engine, a 4sp tranny, no real addl luxury features, and was $10k more expensive. The current generation GRADUATES to "executive" class, which has been Acura's problem--they don't really have a true flagship car. And, in the "executive" class, it's a good solid car, but not a class beater by any means.

 

I think what a large problem is that Acura has dug themselves into a fanbase of people who like FWD luxury sedans. And if they abandon that for a RWD chassis than they lose that fanbase but they still can't compete with the other luxury marques. It's really hard to cross-shop cars that don't have the same drive train type. And they need to upgrade from FWD when they keep adding more technology that weighs more and requires a bigger engine to move it. I guess SH-AWD is their answer but it's a pretty poor one considering it's cost.
Alot of people like the fact that they drive a glorified Honda (I mean that in the nicest way).

 

BOYS, BOYS. Take it outside, will ya? Just PM each other and work out your issues.

 

let's see comparing to TL-S or CL-S(260hp version)... it's barely making 200hp at the wheels... compared to that 22% loss isn't bad. Plus this layout was designed for 91+ legends which I think is impressive.

 

Its a very nice car, it just needs turbos, better rubber, and a better suspension setup.

 

The legend had about 20% loss, which is not bad at all.

 

DOHC V8 engine and RWD are the must have for the future RL to even have a chance to become successful. When you look at the Acura/Honda mid-sized sedan, three models are so close in size, performance, and features level, and they are Acura RL, Acura TL, and Honda Accord V6 sedan. Now all of them are FWD, all of them have a 3.5L SOHC V6 engine with horsepower output from 270-290, all of them are mid to large car size, and most of the must have features in RL could also be found in a fully-loaded V6 Accord, let alone TL. And yet, their price are from $29,000 to almost $50,000. Why do I buy RL if I could almost get the same thing for so much less money when I buy TL or Accord V6? Therefore, Acura must differentiate these three cars more. Since TL and Accord sell, then the only car need changes is RL. Enlarge the next RL to at least 197" long and have a at least 4.0L V8 in it. Price it around the current RL level, then I think its sales would be drastically improved.