LexFather

It takes a certain type of amazing to produce 3 consecutive generation failures in this car. How Honda is last to this class (everything else is older) and is also last in class is quite the feat. There is not one quality about this car better than anything in class outside of maybe the most headlights ever in the universe and 1-2 MPG highway fuel economy. Its amazing to think this is the best they can do, this is their 'Flagship".

There are way to many better entries in class and you have to be a real special person to purchase one and overlook the fact you bought the worst vehicle in class but you had to have an Acura for whatever reason.

Seriously, its the same story with the RL since 1996. Adding an X solves nothing.

Hoovey689

iTrader: (16)

While I agree it competes better to the aforementioned and the A6 for that matter, Acura does list the latter as two of it's main competitors. You'll find it in most of their advertising / comparison material they send to the dealerships

mmarshall

No. The new pastor at our church has a black one that he just bought just a few weeks ago (he bought it before we met), and I've looked it over briefly, but haven't actually driven one.

(BTW, he was blown away when he saw how well the SCRATCH-OUT that I recommend works. I gave him a bottle and showed him how to take out a few small surface-scratches (yes, even on a brand-new car).

mmarshall

It isn't just a matter of numbers and sticker-prices. I've reviewed a new Accord. It's a good, reliable, well-made family sedan in its own right, but, IMO, compared to an RLX, it's crude, uncomfortable, noisy, and stiff-riding. The RLX is a Tier-2 luxury car....the Accord simply isn't. There are reasons why an Accord costs 25-30K and an RLX almost twice that.

mmarshall

This review was requested by a CL member who, IMO, is indeed special and well-respected. I usually don't name CL requests in public (if they don't ask in public themselves), because of the privacy of the PM system.......which I respect. Sometimes, the person with the request names him or herself....sometimes not. Whether this review will lead to a sale or not, I don't know....we'll see. I also had one or two non-CL requests for it....one from fellow parishioners at my church.

By 1996, Acura had generally reached its peak and was starting a long slide, except for the extremely well-built 3Gen Integra (the one with the four small round headlights), which was wildly popular with the young tuning and caps-on-backward crowd. A late friend of mine (who passed away from cancer last year) had a 1999 Integra sedan that, with almost 200K on it, was almost as solid as the day it was built...and still ran like it (I sometimes drove him home in it after a party as the designated driver). That car was simply amazing how well it was built.

The RL, back then, did not seem as solidly-built, but, because of its conservative design and smooth ride, got a reputation as the Japanese Buick. The 2Gen model wasn't quite as comfy but was built like a tank, and had the superb SH-AWD. The 3Gen seems to be returning somewhat to its Japanese-Buick roots.

mmarshall

The way I look at it, company marketers can make any claim they want, but when I review a vehicle, someone has usually asked me for MY opinion as to what it competes with, not the company's. And, in turn, it is my opinion they will get. Same with you and your own HooveyReviews (not the Autoblog ones)........right? (and you do a good job on the HooveyReviews) . I explained to LexsCTJill, a few posts ago, why I thought the ES and Lacrosse were not the best comparisons to the RLX....and what cars I felt WERE.

Of course, neither one of us is infallible. I sometimes change my mind or adjust/correct something I've written, if someone presents a credible reason for doing so. I sometimes also forget some spec-data.

(BTW, I agree on much of the RLX/A6 comparison. You have a valid point, except for the A6's small 2.0L turbo four...and, incidentally, that turbo four makes almost the same torque as the much bigger 3.5L V6 in the RLX. As I stated in last week's A3 review, it has long been one of my favorite small engines.

corradoMR2

Agree. However, I'm just talking about styling and resemblance to an Accord, not comparing craftsmanship since they are day and night.

In short, Acura lost their mojo since they dropped the Legend (then Integra) nameplates and they ain't getting my money for their blander-than-vanilla RLX (and this is coming from an avid Honda/Acura owner and fan of yore).

Hoovey689

iTrader: (16)

For what it's worth the 370hp RLX SH-AWD Hybrid should prove to be more competitive to the aforementioned models.

I am itching to sample this new 'performance' hybrid tech from Acura

Sulu

Mike: I believe that stlgrym3 was talking about the new, just-introduced TLX (with the "X" suffix), not the old, controversially-styled TL(without the "X" suffix).

The new TLX will be cheaper than the "flagship" RLX, yet offer more modern technology, namely the 9-speed automatic transmission, when the RLX still only offers a mere 6-speed.

It does not matter that the 6-speed is "perfectly adequate". When other luxury cars (that Acura claims to be its competition) are starting to offer 7-, 8- and 9-speed transmissions (regardless if a 5- or 6-speed is perfectly adequate), and a even a much cheaper, lower model in the line-up offers a 9-speed, the flagship needs to offer that leading-edge technology also.

dseag2

Thanks, Mike Marshall. I traded in a great '04 Acura TL for an '05 RL. The dealer gave me a deal I couldn't refuse. You're right. It was vault-like in its quality and the interior was quite nice. The paint on the car was incredible by today's standards. The SH-AWD was also great when taking sweeping corners at speed. Aside from that, it felt pretty much like a nose-heavy, FWD car.

I think the reasons it didn't sell were because 1) it looked too much like it belonged in the Honda family and 2) it looked small, even though I believe the dimensions were the same as the E Class, 5 Series, etc. at that time. The design just made it look smaller. I had a business colleague that had the first gen RL, traded for an E Class, and felt the '05 RL was too small.

My personal challenge was that Acura had multiple TSBs on the car due to various first-year issues, and I was tired of visiting the Acura dealer for service . Each time, they would make me fill out a plethora of paperwork for a loaner car that wasn't required by Infiniti or Lexus, so I traded it after 6 months for an Infiniti M45. (Yes, I root for the underdogs!)

mmarshall

Good luck. They may not be easy to find.

mmarshall

Anytime....glad you enjoyed it.


Thanks for sharing. I probably would have bought one myself except that price range (which I could still afford) was a little more than I cared to spend. Besides, their low sales meant high depreciation.

Were you satisfied with your purchase? How long did you keep it? Not many people on CL actually owned one.

Agreed. While I personally didn't find any thing wrong with the styling, it did, to some extent, remind one of a somewhat larger Accord.

Well, I guess that answers two of my previous questions.

mmarshall

Next planned review (Per CL request, although I too have a lot of interest in it).....Lincoln MKC.

This is going to be a critically important new vehicle for Lincoln, and could determine the whole future of the division.

bagwell

Nice post and Hear! Hear! I root for the underdogs as well!

yowps3

Another great review man!

Although the RLX isn't selling well it represents something different, today almost all the brands are chasing sport this & that but in the grand scheme of things I'd say a plush, smooth and refined car is far more beneficial for the customer.

It probably cost more to make a smooth, well insulated car with premium materials than a "sports luxury" car