Edmunds Full Test: 2009 Acura RL Full Test (o-60 in 7.2 seconds)
10-17-08, 05:21 PM
#31
Lexus Fanatic
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: A better place
Posts: 7,285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I must say, in real-life pics the car looks even *worse* than Acura press pics. The CMBS/ACC sensor right below the fang grill looks horrendous. Could Acura not have concealed it in a more subtle manner?
What really got my attention from the Edmunds interview:
Exactly the problem with a lot of Hondas and vehicles from other brands. A car may feel sporty and racy, but it could be as slow as a turtle, which is exactly the case here.
No matter how sporty or racy the RL "feels", fact is it will get smoked in a straight line by a lot of Nissans and Toyotas.
Feel does NOT necessarily correspond to actual, real performance.
Nice to see a major publication talk about the big issue of brake fade that a lot of Honda and Acura products have.
Particularly on a luxury car, severe brake fade and smoking pads are simply unacceptable.
What really got my attention from the Edmunds interview:
Originally Posted by Edmunds
What Needs Work:
Bland styling with an awkward front grille; severe brake fade during high-performance driving; subpar acceleration.
Bland styling with an awkward front grille; severe brake fade during high-performance driving; subpar acceleration.
Originally Posted by Edmunds
It's fun to spin the engine up to the 6,800-rpm rev limit in every gear, focusing on the cartoonish tach that looks as if it were lifted off a Civic, and listening to the racy engine growl and exhaust note. You wouldn't do this with any of the RL's luxury competitors; what would be the point?
But the feeling of quick acceleration isn't supported by the test track numbers, where the 2009 Acura RL recorded a 0-60-mph time of 7.2 seconds (6.8 seconds with 1 foot of rollout like on a drag strip), and 15.3 seconds at 92.8 mph for the quarter-mile. For comparison, the 2009 Hyundai Genesis V6 accelerates to 60 mph in 6.3 seconds (6.1 seconds with 1 foot of rollout like on a drag strip) and does the quarter-mile in 14.6 seconds at 95.6 mph.
But the feeling of quick acceleration isn't supported by the test track numbers, where the 2009 Acura RL recorded a 0-60-mph time of 7.2 seconds (6.8 seconds with 1 foot of rollout like on a drag strip), and 15.3 seconds at 92.8 mph for the quarter-mile. For comparison, the 2009 Hyundai Genesis V6 accelerates to 60 mph in 6.3 seconds (6.1 seconds with 1 foot of rollout like on a drag strip) and does the quarter-mile in 14.6 seconds at 95.6 mph.
No matter how sporty or racy the RL "feels", fact is it will get smoked in a straight line by a lot of Nissans and Toyotas.
Feel does NOT necessarily correspond to actual, real performance.
Originally Posted by Edmunds
Although the RL stopped in 131 feet from 60 mph, there was severe fade on the third attempt as the pedal went to the floor without even any ABS pulsing. For comparison, the 2009 Genesis V6 came to a stop in 117 feet.
Braking performance seems to be an issue with Acura, as the 2009 TSX also exhibited dramatic fade, and the pads were smoking by the third stop.
Braking performance seems to be an issue with Acura, as the 2009 TSX also exhibited dramatic fade, and the pads were smoking by the third stop.
Particularly on a luxury car, severe brake fade and smoking pads are simply unacceptable.
10-17-08, 05:59 PM
#35
Lexus Fanatic
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: California
Posts: 6,084
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For goodness sake, the minutiae being magnified here and the turf war is something else. I will let 1Sick respond for himself but I think we both still agree that the RL is one dandy piece of hardware. It may or may not be in my (or my wife's) future acquisition plans but I don't think either he or I said it was not a competitive car. If that isn't good enough I will tell you that at least last year's RL had one of the best interiors I have ever seen. Easily up there with Audi which I agree with most people are some of the best and while the difference could be more stylistic, right up there with Lexus. It leaves Toyotas and Nissans, including Infinitis, far behind IMO. I'll wait to see the new one at this year's auto show in a month in SF to decide on the redo.
As for the 0-60 time, it is probably competitive although Acura does seem to be becoming mileage challenged. The involved Edmunds review put it this way:
But the feeling of quick acceleration isn't supported by the test track numbers, where the 2009 Acura RL recorded a 0-60-mph time of 7.2 seconds (6.8 seconds with 1 foot of rollout like on a drag strip), and 15.3 seconds at 92.8 mph for the quarter-mile. For comparison, the 2009 Hyundai Genesis V6 accelerates to 60 mph in 6.3 seconds (6.1 seconds with 1 foot of rollout like on a drag strip) and does the quarter-mile in 14.6 seconds at 95.6 mph.
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...ticleId=133767
Before you say that Edmunds got it wrong and that the Genesis V6 was too quick, decide which way you want it. Either Edmunds 0-60s are too slow or too quick, not both.
Only the study hall set buys cars in their fantasies based on brochures and review specs. It is at least competitive. Once again, the problem that I, and I think 1Sick, still have is the price point that Acura priced it at puts it at a point where it is not competitive in that price range IMO. A quick trip to Carsdirect showed the base RL in NoCal carrying a base of 47040 with a price out the door of 43936. I use Carsdirect not because of any desire to promote them but because they are able to quickly give an out the door real world price and my experience is that they can be beat but it gives a good, quick comparison point. I have to think about the RL at 44K for a while. At 55K like the tester, no way can it be competitive IMO regardless of 0-60 time. And I know the base model I got the price for is a stripper but the RL has pretty reasonable standard equipment so I have no problem with it.
As for dumping on Acura, it isn't undeserved. They are failing their supporters big time IMO. That was driven home when some time ago I ran a poll. The poll was "What would you buy if there was no Lexus?" As I recall, Acura won the poll with Audi coming in a close second. And the comments posted about Acura from people on this site, including 1Sick if I recall right, were very, very positive. They might have been based on previous models but the result was pretty clear (maybe time to rerun the poll). There is, or was, a huge support base of positive feeling for Acura, at least from people here. And that is saying something on our Lexus site. But I have to agree that Acura is losing that support with some poor marketing and product development. Goodness knows we don't have so many car makers and models that get it right that we can afford to lose one. But I haven't seen Acura responding in a positive direction with their refreshes or product introductions. And we are all losing with that trend. Choice is good.
As for the 0-60 time, it is probably competitive although Acura does seem to be becoming mileage challenged. The involved Edmunds review put it this way:
But the feeling of quick acceleration isn't supported by the test track numbers, where the 2009 Acura RL recorded a 0-60-mph time of 7.2 seconds (6.8 seconds with 1 foot of rollout like on a drag strip), and 15.3 seconds at 92.8 mph for the quarter-mile. For comparison, the 2009 Hyundai Genesis V6 accelerates to 60 mph in 6.3 seconds (6.1 seconds with 1 foot of rollout like on a drag strip) and does the quarter-mile in 14.6 seconds at 95.6 mph.
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...ticleId=133767
Before you say that Edmunds got it wrong and that the Genesis V6 was too quick, decide which way you want it. Either Edmunds 0-60s are too slow or too quick, not both.
Only the study hall set buys cars in their fantasies based on brochures and review specs. It is at least competitive. Once again, the problem that I, and I think 1Sick, still have is the price point that Acura priced it at puts it at a point where it is not competitive in that price range IMO. A quick trip to Carsdirect showed the base RL in NoCal carrying a base of 47040 with a price out the door of 43936. I use Carsdirect not because of any desire to promote them but because they are able to quickly give an out the door real world price and my experience is that they can be beat but it gives a good, quick comparison point. I have to think about the RL at 44K for a while. At 55K like the tester, no way can it be competitive IMO regardless of 0-60 time. And I know the base model I got the price for is a stripper but the RL has pretty reasonable standard equipment so I have no problem with it.
As for dumping on Acura, it isn't undeserved. They are failing their supporters big time IMO. That was driven home when some time ago I ran a poll. The poll was "What would you buy if there was no Lexus?" As I recall, Acura won the poll with Audi coming in a close second. And the comments posted about Acura from people on this site, including 1Sick if I recall right, were very, very positive. They might have been based on previous models but the result was pretty clear (maybe time to rerun the poll). There is, or was, a huge support base of positive feeling for Acura, at least from people here. And that is saying something on our Lexus site. But I have to agree that Acura is losing that support with some poor marketing and product development. Goodness knows we don't have so many car makers and models that get it right that we can afford to lose one. But I haven't seen Acura responding in a positive direction with their refreshes or product introductions. And we are all losing with that trend. Choice is good.
10-17-08, 06:05 PM
#36
Lexus Fanatic
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: A better place
Posts: 7,285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In other words, even taking into consideration Edmunds usually posts slower times, this is still slow.
When all C&D could manage was 6.5s 0-60, then yes this is slow (comparitively speaking). This points to the painful and obvious fact that Honda just doesn't have a good enough engine for this car. The RL is heavy, and combined with the AWD system needs an engine with not only high HP, but also strong low-end and mid-range torque.
Same thing with the MDX and new Pilot; Honda's new vehicles are getting too heavy for Honda's engines to handle.
10-17-08, 06:12 PM
#37
Guest
Posts: n/a
For goodness sake, the minutiae being magnified here and the turf war is something else. I will let 1Sick respond for himself but I think we both still agree that the RL is one dandy piece of hardware. It may or may not be in my (or my wife's) future acquisition plans but I don't think either he or I said it was not a competitive car. If that isn't good enough I will tell you that at least last year's RL had one of the best interiors I have ever seen. Easily up there with Audi which I agree with most people are some of the best and while the difference could be more stylistic, right up there with Lexus. It leaves Toyotas and Nissans, including Infinitis, far behind IMO. I'll wait to see the new one at this year's auto show in a month in SF to decide on the redo.
As for the 0-60 time, it is probably competitive although Acura does seem to be becoming mileage challenged. The involved Edmunds review put it this way:
But the feeling of quick acceleration isn't supported by the test track numbers, where the 2009 Acura RL recorded a 0-60-mph time of 7.2 seconds (6.8 seconds with 1 foot of rollout like on a drag strip), and 15.3 seconds at 92.8 mph for the quarter-mile. For comparison, the 2009 Hyundai Genesis V6 accelerates to 60 mph in 6.3 seconds (6.1 seconds with 1 foot of rollout like on a drag strip) and does the quarter-mile in 14.6 seconds at 95.6 mph.
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...ticleId=133767
Before you say that Edmunds got it wrong and that the Genesis V6 was too quick, decide which way you want it. Either Edmunds 0-60s are too slow or too quick, not both.
Only the study hall set buys cars in their fantasies based on brochures and review specs. It is at least competitive. Once again, the problem that I, and I think 1Sick, still have is the price point that Acura priced it at puts it at a point where it is not competitive in that price range IMO. A quick trip to Carsdirect showed the base RL in NoCal carrying a base of 47040 with a price out the door of 43936. I use Carsdirect not because of any desire to promote them but because they are able to quickly give an out the door real world price and my experience is that they can be beat but it gives a good, quick comparison point. I have to think about the RL at 44K for a while. At 55K like the tester, no way can it be competitive IMO regardless of 0-60 time. And I know the base model I got the price for is a stripper but the RL has pretty reasonable standard equipment so I have no problem with it.
As for dumping on Acura, it isn't undeserved. They are failing their supporters big time IMO. That was driven home when some time ago I ran a poll. The poll was "What would you buy if there was no Lexus?" As I recall, Acura won the poll with Audi coming in a close second. And the comments posted about Acura from people on this site, including 1Sick if I recall right, were very, very positive. They might have been based on previous models but the result was pretty clear (maybe time to rerun the poll). There is, or was, a huge support base of positive feeling for Acura, at least from people here. And that is saying something on our Lexus site. But I have to agree that Acura is losing that support with some poor marketing and product development. Goodness knows we don't have so many car makers and models that get it right that we can afford to lose one. But I haven't seen Acura responding in a positive direction with their refreshes or product introductions. And we are all losing with that trend. Choice is good.
As for the 0-60 time, it is probably competitive although Acura does seem to be becoming mileage challenged. The involved Edmunds review put it this way:
But the feeling of quick acceleration isn't supported by the test track numbers, where the 2009 Acura RL recorded a 0-60-mph time of 7.2 seconds (6.8 seconds with 1 foot of rollout like on a drag strip), and 15.3 seconds at 92.8 mph for the quarter-mile. For comparison, the 2009 Hyundai Genesis V6 accelerates to 60 mph in 6.3 seconds (6.1 seconds with 1 foot of rollout like on a drag strip) and does the quarter-mile in 14.6 seconds at 95.6 mph.
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...ticleId=133767
Before you say that Edmunds got it wrong and that the Genesis V6 was too quick, decide which way you want it. Either Edmunds 0-60s are too slow or too quick, not both.
Only the study hall set buys cars in their fantasies based on brochures and review specs. It is at least competitive. Once again, the problem that I, and I think 1Sick, still have is the price point that Acura priced it at puts it at a point where it is not competitive in that price range IMO. A quick trip to Carsdirect showed the base RL in NoCal carrying a base of 47040 with a price out the door of 43936. I use Carsdirect not because of any desire to promote them but because they are able to quickly give an out the door real world price and my experience is that they can be beat but it gives a good, quick comparison point. I have to think about the RL at 44K for a while. At 55K like the tester, no way can it be competitive IMO regardless of 0-60 time. And I know the base model I got the price for is a stripper but the RL has pretty reasonable standard equipment so I have no problem with it.
As for dumping on Acura, it isn't undeserved. They are failing their supporters big time IMO. That was driven home when some time ago I ran a poll. The poll was "What would you buy if there was no Lexus?" As I recall, Acura won the poll with Audi coming in a close second. And the comments posted about Acura from people on this site, including 1Sick if I recall right, were very, very positive. They might have been based on previous models but the result was pretty clear (maybe time to rerun the poll). There is, or was, a huge support base of positive feeling for Acura, at least from people here. And that is saying something on our Lexus site. But I have to agree that Acura is losing that support with some poor marketing and product development. Goodness knows we don't have so many car makers and models that get it right that we can afford to lose one. But I haven't seen Acura responding in a positive direction with their refreshes or product introductions. And we are all losing with that trend. Choice is good.
Of course, when I say something about Acura (or Infiniti), a big red alarm goes off throughout the internet and brings the hounds.
Not sure why my words seem to hit like a tidal wave.
10-17-08, 06:24 PM
#38
Lexus Fanatic
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: California
Posts: 6,084
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ron, great post and thanks for throwing the V-6 Genesis number out there for a comparison. You and are absolutely correct (and MMarshall said the same), I nor most have not said the RL is a bad car. It is quite respectable and many here are impressed with its fit and finish and features. It also is no surprise you and me said it wont' stand out in 2005/2006 and it is where it is today.
Of course, when I say something about Acura (or Infiniti), a big red alarm goes off throughout the internet and brings the hounds. Not sure why my words seem to hit like a tidal wave.:uh:
Of course, when I say something about Acura (or Infiniti), a big red alarm goes off throughout the internet and brings the hounds.
Not sure why my words seem to hit like a tidal wave.:uh:I can't take any credit for puting in the V6 Genesis numbers, that's just what Edmunds printed. Interesting that Edmunds would use it as the comparo model to the RL.
10-17-08, 08:03 PM
#39
Lexus Fanatic
iTrader: (20)
Motorweek got 0-60 in 5.8 for the Genesis V8 by the way. And they LOVED the car.
10-18-08, 11:29 AM
#40
Lexus Fanatic
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: California
Posts: 6,084
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
10-18-08, 10:09 PM
#42
Driver School Candidate
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: IL
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I had a 2006 RL before I bought my GS. Numbers are deceiving. One of the things I miss the most of the RL is the torque-vectoring AWD (SHAWD), to me that alone was worth the premium $ made the car feel like driving on rails when taking curves and ramps at high speed. I think BMW is copying it with the new X6 AWD system.
BTW somebody mentioned that the new TL with SH-AWD costs $10K less.. well thats not true. The new SHAWD 09 TL will cost $42K, you can get the tech 09 RL for $48K (all RL's are SHAWD) and still the RL has a more sophisticated rear differential orbital system (5% vs 1.7% rotation bias). Depending on how it looks, I may get the new 2011 RL.. meantime happy with my GS.
BTW somebody mentioned that the new TL with SH-AWD costs $10K less.. well thats not true. The new SHAWD 09 TL will cost $42K, you can get the tech 09 RL for $48K (all RL's are SHAWD) and still the RL has a more sophisticated rear differential orbital system (5% vs 1.7% rotation bias). Depending on how it looks, I may get the new 2011 RL.. meantime happy with my GS.
10-19-08, 12:50 AM
#43
Went to the beach with my wifes coworker and husband so our son's could play together and I could check out their new 2nd hand 07 RL today. We both had our cars parked on the beach, his RL and my 03 GS430 right next to it. I do have to say the RL is a superb car. I did a lot of test driving of it in late 2004 when the 05's just came out but haven't checked one out since. His car had the A-Spec body kit on it and it looked great. I still think the interior fit, finish, and feel are superb. I do realize his car is an 07 and mine is an 03, but it does feel a lot more luxurious and sporty at the same time. Those that haven't been able to drive the RL it really is an amazing drive. SH-AWD is that good IMHO.
PS, I think the 09 exterior update is hideous. I like the sedate look of the 05-08 and would gladly buy one and be happy. I wouldn't buy the new 09 even with its updated engine and other goodies until I was certain I could do a 08 conversion and revert back to the older look.
PS, I think the 09 exterior update is hideous. I like the sedate look of the 05-08 and would gladly buy one and be happy. I wouldn't buy the new 09 even with its updated engine and other goodies until I was certain I could do a 08 conversion and revert back to the older look.
10-20-08, 06:56 PM
#45
Am I the only one That thought that was a Honda Accord. My 98 GS 300 can go 0-60 almost faster than that. Even if it goes in 6.5 sec. that is stupid. Why pay 50k for an Accord.