Honda Car Forum

I remember as a kid, our family of 4 plus our dog all fit in the 78 tercel.
You must have some pretty fat kids if they won't fit in a midsized car....

But anyways, I would say for the money the TL is the better value, perhaps
look at it?

<jeffs9000@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:1135915643.814658.123400@g43g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
> The first generation RL is a large sedan, and I am very happy with it,
> that's why I bought it. That being said, my next car will also be a
> large sedan, not a midsize. I need the room, too many kids and stuff.
>

"karinhall" <ah@nsdp.com> wrote in message
news:nM-dnX4hyfY5eybeRVn-qw@usa2net.net...
>
> <jeffs9000@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:1135913554.026155.13840@o13g2000cwo.googlegro ups.com...
>> Acura sure missed the boat on their 'new RL'. As a current RL owner, I
>> can't express how disappointed I am with this car. >>
> My sentiments exactly. As a current owner of an '02 RL with 41,000 miles,
> I'm disappointed in the new model. They've actually shrunk some of the
> interior dimensions and the trunk, while raising the price! And they're
> still behind the curve with a V-6, even though it's a nice engine, it
> doesn't compete with the V-8 engines in the Lexus line. Hell, a Toyota
> Avalon might be a better value. 8-)
>
But what are looking for in a vehicle, is it strictly price, is it hp, is it
cabin and trunk size?
Surely, if you were wanting a V8 wouldn't you go down that track to begin
with?
If it's just price, okay, go get a Toyota Avalon and save $15k, but would we
see you back here soon after complaining that the Avalon is boring?
Personally, I think the Lexus IS 350 is great value, 306hp V6 with a list
price just over $36,000.
And don't go and compare the IS 350 with the Avalon.
Again, it comes back to what you're really wanting.

James wrote:
> I remember as a kid, our family of 4 plus our dog all fit in the 78 tercel.
> You must have some pretty fat kids if they won't fit in a midsized car....
>
> But anyways, I would say for the money the TL is the better value, perhaps
> look at it?
>
> <jeffs9000@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:1135915643.814658.123400@g43g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
> > The first generation RL is a large sedan, and I am very happy with it,
> > that's why I bought it. That being said, my next car will also be a
> > large sedan, not a midsize. I need the room, too many kids and stuff.
> >

I have a family of 5, and yes, I do have an overweight daughter, but it
is not her fault as she has a chromosome deficiency, so yes, we need
room.

HP, cabin, trunk size? All of the above. I'd be OK with a 300hp V6,
but the new RL is just too small. At 6'3" and about 250, the driver's
seat is usually pretty far back when I'm driving, and from the pics I
saw of the new RL, the occupant behind the drivers seat would have
virtually no leg room. I'm sure the new RL is a fine car, but I have
owned many Acura's in the past and have been pretty loyal to the name
brand, so I'm more disappointed with Acura (Honda Corp) for not
designing the RL as a larger full-size sedan that would compete with
other top flagships (Lexus, Audi, M-Benz, BMW, etc). The new design of
the RL (now a mid-size vs. full-size) looks like Honda just up and
quit, thinking "Why should we design a full-size RL when we know we
can't compete with the other big guns?". I'm just disappointed because
I now have to leave the Acura brand because the engineers at Honda were
thinking small instead of thinking big. I'm sure I'll be very happy
with my used LS430.

HP, cabin, trunk size? All of the above. I'd be OK with a 300hp V6,
but the new RL is just too small. At 6'3" and about 250, the driver's
seat is usually pretty far back when I'm driving, and from the pics I
saw of the new RL, the occupant behind the drivers seat would have
virtually no leg room. I'm sure the new RL is a fine car, but I have
owned many Acura's in the past and have been pretty loyal to the name
brand, so I'm more disappointed with Acura (Honda Corp) for not
designing the RL as a larger full-size sedan that would compete with
other top flagships (Lexus, Audi, M-Benz, BMW, etc). The new design of
the RL (now a mid-size vs. full-size) looks like Honda just up and
quit, thinking "Why should we design a full-size RL when we know we
can't compete with the other big guns?". I'm just disappointed because
I now have to leave the Acura brand because the engineers at Honda were
thinking small instead of thinking big. I'm sure I'll be very happy
with my used LS430.

HP, cabin, trunk size? All of the above. I'd be OK with a 300hp V6,
but the new RL is just too small. At 6'3" and about 250, the driver's
seat is usually pretty far back when I'm driving, and from the pics I
saw of the new RL, the occupant behind the drivers seat would have
virtually no leg room. I'm sure the new RL is a fine car, but I have
owned many Acura's in the past and have been pretty loyal to the name
brand, so I'm more disappointed with Acura (Honda Corp) for not
designing the RL as a larger full-size sedan that would compete with
other top flagships (Lexus, Audi, M-Benz, BMW, etc). The new design of
the RL (now a mid-size vs. full-size) looks like Honda just up and
quit, thinking "Why should we design a full-size RL when we know we
can't compete with the other big guns?". I'm just disappointed because
I now have to leave the Acura brand because the engineers at Honda were
thinking small instead of thinking big. I'm sure I'll be very happy
with my used LS430.

Yep, got the idea the first time.

<jeffs9000@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:1136514110.027930.141110@o13g2000cwo.googlegr oups.com...
> HP, cabin, trunk size? All of the above. I'd be OK with a 300hp V6,
> but the new RL is just too small. At 6'3" and about 250, the driver's
> seat is usually pretty far back when I'm driving, and from the pics I
> saw of the new RL, the occupant behind the drivers seat would have
> virtually no leg room. I'm sure the new RL is a fine car, but I have
> owned many Acura's in the past and have been pretty loyal to the name
> brand, so I'm more disappointed with Acura (Honda Corp) for not
> designing the RL as a larger full-size sedan that would compete with
> other top flagships (Lexus, Audi, M-Benz, BMW, etc). The new design of
> the RL (now a mid-size vs. full-size) looks like Honda just up and
> quit, thinking "Why should we design a full-size RL when we know we
> can't compete with the other big guns?". I'm just disappointed because
> I now have to leave the Acura brand because the engineers at Honda were
> thinking small instead of thinking big. I'm sure I'll be very happy
> with my used LS430.
>

"karinhall" <ah@nsdp.com> wrote in message
news:NYidnRb1b_1vHCPenZ2dnUVZ_s-dnZ2d@usa2net.net...
>
> <jeffs9000@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:1136514110.027930.141110@o13g2000cwo.googlegr oups.com...
>> HP, cabin, trunk size? All of the above. I'd be OK with a 300hp V6,
>> but the new RL is just too small. At 6'3" and about 250, the driver's
>> seat is usually pretty far back when I'm driving, and from the pics I
>> saw of the new RL, the occupant behind the drivers seat would have
>> virtually no leg room. >>
>
> As a current '02 RL owner, the above statement fits my sentiments about
> Acura exactly. Too bad they didn't go with a little bigger car. Good
> car, just too small for the money they're asking.
>
>
So what do you favour then?

On 5 Jan 2006 17:59:03 -0800, jeffs9000@comcast.net wrote:

>HP, cabin, trunk size? All of the above. I'd be OK with a 300hp V6,
>but the new RL is just too small. At 6'3" and about 250, the driver's
>seat is usually pretty far back when I'm driving, and from the pics I
>saw of the new RL, the occupant behind the drivers seat would have
>virtually no leg room. I'm sure the new RL is a fine car, but I have
>owned many Acura's in the past and have been pretty loyal to the name
>brand, so I'm more disappointed with Acura (Honda Corp) for not
>designing the RL as a larger full-size sedan that would compete with
>other top flagships (Lexus, Audi, M-Benz, BMW, etc). The new design of
>the RL (now a mid-size vs. full-size) looks like Honda just up and
>quit, thinking "Why should we design a full-size RL when we know we
>can't compete with the other big guns?". I'm just disappointed because
>I now have to leave the Acura brand because the engineers at Honda were
>thinking small instead of thinking big. I'm sure I'll be very happy
>with my used LS430.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion but it's MY opinion
that you're way too hung up on size -- and what you believe is a
too small RL. It's really not a small vehicle -- even in
comparison with the vehicles you mention a bigger. Personally,
I'd not have purchased one of it were bigger.

As I said, we are all entitled to our opinions.

On Fri, 6 Jan 2006 09:42:56 -0500, "karinhall" <ah@nsdp.com>
wrote:

>As a current '02 RL owner, the above statement fits my sentiments about Acura exactly. Too bad they didn't go with a little bigger car. Good car, just too small for the money they're asking.

Bigger isn't the only criteria required to judge a vehicle. It's
not even close to being the most important -- at least to me.