CK6Speed

iTrader: (1)

I would say she mostly downloads to her iPod, but she also coverts a lot of actual store bought CDs into MP3s to load mostly into the iPod, but also has burned a couple of CDs as well. I think what she mostly wants is an iPod connection, but i also believe that a player than can play MP3s is also desireable to her because she rather have many songs on 1 disc. Why? I don't know especially when the indash 6 disc player is holds more than enough CDs. I think a HDD is a good choice. The Alpine HDD player is getting very popular. Eclipse has a deck that will automatically store played CDs into the internal hard drive in the deck. Just listening around car forums or even car audio forums where you think they are into higher end media playback MP3 capability seems to come up a lot. I hear a lot of people choose the Alpine CHA-S634 CD changer over the Alpine CHM-S630 CD changer for example, specifically because it has MP3 playback capability. To tell you the truth, I'm the wrong guy to ask this question because I don't really keep up with MP3 or generarlly get involved with MP3 discussions since I don't use the format. I'm more into the DVD-A capabilities than MP3 compatible capabilities

OneOfOne

I find it hard to believe that features from the top of the line ls are trickling downwards and features people dont even think of until they dont have them any more [ like a woman I heard saying she misses her door closers and regrets trading down to an es ] yet something easily added like mp3 isnt. just think of all the features from the ls that are now gs options yet nowhere is mp3? I think customers by and large just do not care. further I think the typical poster in the gs and lower model forums are considerably younger and in fact dont even buy most of the cars here new. so I dont think a representative slice of the market is here. thats why I say [I think} most lexus buyers dont care about mp3.

dseag2

The M is definitely the sportier of the two because it is a RWD vehicle. The RL is a FWD vehicle that transfers torque to the rear wheels when needed. The RL can hang in corners like nobody's business, but the M is still more fun to drive. Actually, my FX is more fun to drive than the RL. The steering is tight and there is always power available. It's just not nearly as luxurious. If I could use words to describe the difference, the RL's handling is great but it's more "mechanical", the Infiniti's is more "natural". Does that make sense?

As for dash layout and controls on the RL and M, I find the RL to be very intuitive and attractive. I didn't spend enough time in the M to become comfortable with the setup, but I found it to be attractive as well.

Re: displacement, I've never doubted that Lexus can equal or better the competition in displacement and 0-60 times. My disappointment has always been in the way the cars handle. My SC430 was probably my most favorite car, and it could really move, but I never felt the suspension could keep up with that wonderful V-8 engine. It almost felt unsafe to take corners with any speed, and even though I'm long past my Mario Andretti days, if I took a corner with a passenger in the car they were thrown against the door because of the body roll. My GS300 was much better, but only after L-tuned shocks, suspension, and steering ECU. I don't feel I should have to pay the price of a new Lexus, then pay additional $$$ to make it fun to drive.

I don't personally think it's all about speed. Even in everyday traffic, I want the ability to manuever a vehicle around obstacles (like bad drivers!). There's a safety benefit in good handling. There's also the added benefit of enjoying a curve or two when the time is right.

psteng19

All of Acura's vehicles are FWD biased so I would hardly call them the Japan equivalent of BMW

CK6Speed

iTrader: (1)

I beg to differ. My mid engine RWD Acura is definately not FWD bias and IMHO it by far has better driving dynamics and feel than the BMW I owned and any of the Lexus cars I own. But, if you are talking about the RL. You would feel any FWD bias in that car at all anyway so technically it bahaves more like a RWD car than FWD car so what is the point? Even if we don't talk about the SH-AWD RL what about the Integra Type R? I would say it is hard to describe that car as FWD bias even though it is FWD. It has more neutral handling than some RWD cars and still can swing the rear end out if one desired.

MPLexus301

iTrader: (3)

The NSX, while still an Acura, is really a wildcard here and doesn't have a BMW model that it directly competes with. It's a fabulous car to drive though, regardless. As far as TSX, TL, and RL are concerned they are ALL either FWD or FWD biased. As state-of-the-art as Acura's SH-AWD is, the RL's power delivery is split 70% at the front wheels and 30% at the rear wheels in normal driving. Hardly RWD or even RWD-biased in any regard. Every review that I have read indicates that the RL has no problem gripping the road but sportiness is not it's fortay, even less so than the new GS. There are some inherent things about a FWD chassis that will never be overcome and until Acura wants to correct them by moving to a RWD setup, their lineup will have performance that is somewhat retarded (literally) by their platforms. Period.

Cars like the Celica GT-S, RSX-S and Integra Type R are too light and too small to display characteristics typical of a FWD layout.

CK6Speed

iTrader: (1)

I see your point, but I still have a hard time buying that just because the RL has a 70% FWD bias under normal cruising conditions it behaves like a FWD biased car. Hear me out here. Under normal cruising I don't really think anyone can tell the difference between a FWD, AWD, or RWD car. I also doubt anyone can tell the difference if only one front wheel was propelling the car. It is only under certain conditions like hard acceleration, cornering, and maybe breaking where the chassis dynamics are really felt. In this case, the RL instantly transfers torque and power to the approriate wheels pretty much giving it a RWD feel at that instant when needed. Now, I am at a disadvantage since I don't have long term driving experience in the RL, I extensively test drove it once though. However, the RL even though it supposedly is FWD bias has a much sportier driving experience than my SC400. To further help my claim, I know of at least one NSX owner that just bought an RL and describes the driving feeling as very close to that of the NSX (Obviouslty not in acceleration or flat out handling). To tell you the truth, I think we can chalk all that up to the SH-AWD. It really does a wonderful job at holding back all the bad. You would think in a FWD biased transverse mounted engine car it would have major torque steer. The RL doesn't have any. You would think it has heavy pig like steering especially around corners. It does not. Take way the SH-AWD and the RL probably will handle like crap. However, it does have it and it really does transform the car into something it shouldn't be IMHO. I guess the real argument is not how the car behaves, but more the means to the end. Some may not like the idea of all that electronics and would much rather have the traditional proven layout. I could easily accept that as an argument. I'm just not ready to buy that the car bahaves like a FWD car though.

Oh, what about the Integra Type R? What are your thought's on that car? It has ben said to have wonderful driving dynamics that rivals RWD cars. Very neutral and even oversteer happy when pushed hard enough. Never mind, I just read your last paragraph.

MPLexus301

iTrader: (3)

I don't think that the RL necessarily behaves like every other FWD car because SH-AWD does provide the car with a ridiculous amount of grip and also helps to distribute the power to all four wheels when the driving gets aggressive. The car utilizes an AWD system that has been formatted for a FWD chassis and thus, it has a FWD- biased AWD system. Under normal cruising conditions, as in going straight on the highway, I don't think that anyone could tell the difference between a FWD, RWD and AWD car because it's when the pavements gets a bit twisty, or wet, or icey, that things start to become noticeable. Most FWD cars are somewhat noseheavy simply because the engine and driveshaft are all at the front end. In a RWD car there is better weight balance because the engine is at the front of the car (in most cases) and the driveshaft is at the back end, and thus things tend to balance eachother out. The noseheavy nature of FWD cars becomes noticeable sometimes just when you twitch the steering wheel. The car is typically slower to react because the front end is...heavier. RWD cars tend to have better weight distrubution than FWD ones which is something that is noticeable, but also RWD allows the back of the car to break free easier. While some FWD cars may allow the back end to slide out and some RWD cars may not, it really comes down to the feeling of being pushed (RWD) vs. being pulled (FWD) in some aspects.

Suspension also has a lot to do with how a car feels. I drive a FWD Camry but it has TRD shocks and struts, low profile tires on BBS wheels, a front strut mount and a rear sway bar. My car DRIVES and FEELS tighter and harder than a RWD GS430 but at the limit the GS is certainly going to wipe the floor with my car, and in more ways than just acceleration . Oh yea, and my car certainly feels noseheavy and it's just the 4cylinder. Tight suspensions and lower profile tires deal with how a car feels getting up to the limit and can mask those inherent FWD characteristics, whereas drivetrain layout actually determines those limits and characteristics in the first place.

I could be wrong but I believe that the RL does maintain a 70% Front/ 30% Rear power distribution through most driving situations. I think that it's in cornering and rough weather where the power delivery begins to change itself around and even then SH-AWD seeks to prevent wheel slippage and a loss of traction...something that is easier to do in RWD cars just because of their layout.

The TL is one of the best FWD cars that I have ever driven, and I have to be honest, I think I'd buy one over any of its RWD or AWD competitiors (that might change on March 1st ). It felt almost as agile as a BMW 530i and actually more planted and more secure than the G35 that I also drove in the same day. Acura has done a good job of making FWD cars sporty feeling (TSX and TL namely), but the RL's biggest enemy is weight. I believe that the car weighs about 4,000 lbs and it's common knowlege that weight is any cars worst enemy. It's the RL's weight that makes the car harder to manage and less enthusiastic to drive. Coupling an FWD-biased-AWD system that tries to prevent any slippage or loss of traction with a car that weighs almost two tons just doesn't result in an overly athletic package, at least when compared to the competition.

The RL isn't a bad car at all, it's just not really sporty. The A-Spec will probably help to change that a bit, but see my second paragraph for more on that .

-Michael-

dseag2

I was with you until you threw this in. Sportiness is certainly not its forte when compared to the M, but it certainly isn't less sporty than the new GS. Go drive both and see for yourself.