TonyEX
 |
|
Hey... great idea.
Five dollar a gallon for premium... hey! Let's bring in an inefficient sedan ( VCM or not...). (*)
Bring in the V8 at $70K, sell 5% of the RL with a V8 and then sell 95% of them with a 320bhp V6.
Oddly, it might work, such is the sheer stupidity of the marketing community, the car magazines and much of the consumer world.
(*) IMHO with the Odyssey's VCM, it kills performance. I'd rather have a proper two stage VTEC tuned for top end power than the lousy 2MPG that I may gain with VCM. In the RL, I think I'd rather have a DOHC iVTEC 3.2L V6 with a 7 speed transmission than 4.whatever V8 with VCM. Yawn...
|
myhui
|
|
Are you getting in line for the Civic GX? I am.
And they'll reward GX customers by letting them be first in line to buy the Clarity when it becomes widely available and gasoline is at $10/gallon.
|
thepowerofhonda
|
|
|
So why does it have to be an inefficient sedan? The Corvette gets 28 MPG on the road and makes enormous HP. The reason is that it has a very tall top gear. I have often wondered why Honda (or any other car makers for that matter) does not uses the same principal with the bigger HP models. After all, it does not require 425 HP or even 200 HP to cruise at 75 MPH down the highway. Honda has chosen instead to use VMC. It clearly does not work as effectively as a very tall top gear on the Corvette.
|
onetyme_sam
|
|
|
Well. if you havent noticed the sales of the current RL, and the new MMC of the RL, to me, its not looking that good even though i think the old RL looks much better. if honda wants to keep the car alive, something needs to be done, risk or no risk, this needs to be done. I believe this is the right track. dont offer a premium v6 to compete with a m45 or LS. already curious how it is and might be interested on purchasing something like this.
|
siegen
|
|
thepowerofhonda wrote:
So why does it have to be an inefficient sedan? The Corvette gets 28 MPG on the road and makes enormous HP. The reason is that it has a very tall top gear. I have often wondered why Honda (or any other car makers for that matter) does not uses the same principal with the bigger HP models. After all, it does not require 425 HP or even 200 HP to cruise at 75 MPH down the highway. Honda has chosen instead to use VMC. It clearly does not work as effectively as a very tall top gear on the Corvette.
|
They don't apply the same principle as the Corvette because they can't apply that same principle to a luxury sedan. The Corvette gets good highway mileage because it is lightweight and has a very streamline profile. The tall gearing also makes a difference, but it is by no means the singular reason.
|
longhorn
|
|
thepowerofhonda wrote:
So why does it have to be an inefficient sedan? The Corvette gets 28 MPG on the road and makes enormous HP. The reason is that it has a very tall top gear. I have often wondered why Honda (or any other car makers for that matter) does not uses the same principal with the bigger HP models. After all, it does not require 425 HP or even 200 HP to cruise at 75 MPH down the highway. Honda has chosen instead to use VMC. It clearly does not work as effectively as a very tall top gear on the Corvette.
|
I agree PowerofHonda, if you got the Corvette forums out there the owners state they routinely get 30mpg on the hwy in cruise. The old GM F body Camaro got the same thing, 30mpg on the hwy with a V-8.
Honda stated their new V-10 was estimated to get 27mpg on the hwy (25mpg using Japan numbers). The coupe the V-10 is slated to go in is rumored, according to this Edmunds site to be the same chassis for the next RL. With two less cylnders,Acura should be able to pull high 20s for highway MPG.
|
CivicB18
|
|
siegen wrote:
thepowerofhonda wrote:
So why does it have to be an inefficient sedan? The Corvette gets 28 MPG on the road and makes enormous HP. The reason is that it has a very tall top gear. I have often wondered why Honda (or any other car makers for that matter) does not uses the same principal with the bigger HP models. After all, it does not require 425 HP or even 200 HP to cruise at 75 MPH down the highway. Honda has chosen instead to use VMC. It clearly does not work as effectively as a very tall top gear on the Corvette.
|
They don't apply the same principle as the Corvette because they can't apply that same principle to a luxury sedan. The Corvette gets good highway mileage because it is lightweight and has a very streamline profile. The tall gearing also makes a difference, but it is by no means the singular reason.
|
It also doesnt have to rev to achieve more than adequate acceleration as its has BOATLOADS of low end torque because of its valvetrain layout and large displacement. There are many variables as to why the Corvette seems efficient at least on paper.
Back on topic. I really dont see anything wrong with giving the RL the performance and engine choices 99% of its competition has as that is one of the things that has held the RL (and Acura) back for many years. I say build the damned thing already!
~LP
|
siegen
|
|
TonyE wrote:
Five dollar a gallon for premium... hey! Let's bring in an inefficient sedan ( VCM or not...). (*)
Bring in the V8 at $70K, sell 5% of the RL with a V8 and then sell 95% of them with a 320bhp V6.
Oddly, it might work, such is the sheer stupidity of the marketing community, the car magazines and much of the consumer world.
|
You're right, it might work. In fact, it probably will, given the way people follow the media.
Even if a V6 makes up 95% of RL sales, having the V8 will give it the image it needs. The image Acura desperately needs!
Look at BMW. Their 1, 3, and 5 series all base with the same 230hp 3.0L. That's it, less horsepower than the base TL and base RL.
And just one year ago the 3-series sedan based with a 215hp 3.0L, and the coupe with a 184hp 2.5L. But people don't gripe about low horsepower BMW's because the magazines don't gripe about it. And the mags don't gripe about it because they always test drive the high horsepower trims. Such is the way things work, so many consumers are sheep.
Nobody blasted Acura for its low horsepower base RSX, because all of the mags tested the Type S. So as long as there is a high power version available, generally people won't gripe about the low horsepower. This works with V6 vs V8 as well, I believe. As long as the RL has the option of a high power V8, people shouldn't complain about the base V6.
|
Nate34
|
|
TonyE wrote:
Hey... great idea.
Five dollar a gallon for premium... hey! Let's bring in an inefficient sedan ( VCM or not...). (*)
Bring in the V8 at $70K, sell 5% of the RL with a V8 and then sell 95% of them with a 320bhp V6.
Oddly, it might work, such is the sheer stupidity of the marketing community, the car magazines and much of the consumer world.
(*) IMHO with the Odyssey's VCM, it kills performance. I'd rather have a proper two stage VTEC tuned for top end power than the lousy 2MPG that I may gain with VCM. In the RL, I think I'd rather have a DOHC iVTEC 3.2L V6 with a 7 speed transmission than 4.whatever V8 with VCM. Yawn...
|
There is always a market for luxury cars, if you cannot afford the gas, just don't buy a luxury car and stop bitching about it.
The V8 selling far less than V6 is well known across luxury brands. It does push the V6's though. Lexus, Infiniti, MB, etc
|
CivicB18
|
|
TonyE wrote:
Hey... great idea.
Five dollar a gallon for premium... hey! Let's bring in an inefficient sedan ( VCM or not...). (*)
Bring in the V8 at $70K, sell 5% of the RL with a V8 and then sell 95% of them with a 320bhp V6.
Oddly, it might work, such is the sheer stupidity of the marketing community, the car magazines and much of the consumer world.
(*) IMHO with the Odyssey's VCM, it kills performance. I'd rather have a proper two stage VTEC tuned for top end power than the lousy 2MPG that I may gain with VCM. In the RL, I think I'd rather have a DOHC iVTEC 3.2L V6 with a 7 speed transmission than 4.whatever V8 with VCM. Yawn...
|
The current RL isnt exactly a leader in fuel efficiency and its not what Id call a fast car by any means given the on paper power ratings. For the money you can get a Lexus GS350 AWD or a M35AWD that offer much better accleration with similar or better EPA ratings. Or you can spend a bit more and and get a 535Xi that will crush ANY RL in acceleration, deliver better EPA ratings. I know EPA ratings arent the best source but Im going to use them as a reference anyway.
EPA 6cyl / 6cyl AWD Ratings:
Acura RL: N/A AWD: 16/24
Lexus GS350: 19/27 AWD: 18/25
BMW 535i: 17/26 AWD: 17/25
Infiniti M35: 16/23 AWD: 16/22
Audi A6 3.2: 24 combined AWD: 22 combined
Mercedes E350: 17/24 AWD: N/A
Cadillac STS V6: 17/26 AWD: 17/26
This proposed/rumoured RL FR car with the V8 wouldnt have to be a true gas guzzler especially since Acura has expressed their concern about fuel efficiency. Id really like to see what Acura could do with a PROPER FR sport sedan. Some of the V8 sedan EPA ratings come close, mirror or better current RL V6 ratings.
EPA V8 ratings:
Acura RL: No V8 offered!
Lexus GS460: 17 city / 24 hwy
BMW 550i: 22 hwy
Infiniti M45: 16 city / 21 hwy
Audi A6 4.2 Quattro: 20 combined
Mercedes E550: 15 city / 22hwy
Cadillac STS V8: 15 city / 24 hwy
Id like to think that Acura would or could improve the VCM as its evident that it saps out midrange torque to a large degree. A 3.2L V6 wouldnt be at all competitive as the RL isnt exactly light weight and the competition offer some impressive 6 cylinder offerings. This car will need plentiful low/midrange torque accompanied by that signature VTEC top end and a nice 6 or 7 speed AT to be truly competitive. Give it at least a 3.5L V6 with some clever valvetrain technology, DI, a-Vtec and some other items.
I do however agree with you on fuel efficiency being a priority as gas is rediculously expensive, its about $3.30 here in central Ky for regular 87 oct. But to be considered a TRUE competitor you sometimes have to fight fire with fire and dismiss compromise.
~LP
|
CarShark
|
|
|
I take it that TonyE wasn't part of the huge outcry that I've always seen on this board of people wondering "Why doesn't the flagship have a V-8?" I agree that the V-8 won't be a big seller, but it's a big part of the luxury image, especially in America.
|
CarPhreakD
|
|
CivicB18 wrote:
siegen wrote:
thepowerofhonda wrote:
So why does it have to be an inefficient sedan? The Corvette gets 28 MPG on the road and makes enormous HP. The reason is that it has a very tall top gear. I have often wondered why Honda (or any other car makers for that matter) does not uses the same principal with the bigger HP models. After all, it does not require 425 HP or even 200 HP to cruise at 75 MPH down the highway. Honda has chosen instead to use VMC. It clearly does not work as effectively as a very tall top gear on the Corvette.
|
They don't apply the same principle as the Corvette because they can't apply that same principle to a luxury sedan. The Corvette gets good highway mileage because it is lightweight and has a very streamline profile. The tall gearing also makes a difference, but it is by no means the singular reason.
|
It also doesnt have to rev to achieve more than adequate acceleration as its has BOATLOADS of low end torque because of its valvetrain layout and large displacement. There are many variables as to why the Corvette seems efficient at least on paper.
Back on topic. I really dont see anything wrong with giving the RL the performance and engine choices 99% of its competition has as that is one of the things that has held the RL (and Acura) back for many years. I say build the damned thing already!
~LP
|
At highway speeds the Corvette is basically idling, which helps explains the high MPG. That, and the fact that GM engineers have implemented that bastardly skip shift feature that forces you to shift to a higher gear in order to bypass the gas guzzler tax (easily disabled). As CivicB18 mentioned, it has more than adequate torque for cruising at those RPMs (with that much displacement I don't see how it's possible not to...). However, in city driving the Vette's fuel economy plummets (15 mpg or so) so it's not like anything comes free....
As for why Honda doesn't utilize a very tall cruising gear- that is because they don't have a 6 speed auto tranny! Their 6 MTs are focussed on sport and are therefore close-ratio (justified), but I think that for the ATs Honda could probably get away with 5 closely spaced gears and one very tall one for highway cruising, since nobody really cares about sport in the AT models anyways... And Honda needs to refine VCM as well.
|
mobomofo
|
|
siegen wrote:
The Corvette gets good highway mileage because it is lightweight and has a very streamline profile. The tall gearing also makes a difference, but it is by no means the singular reason.
|
The transmission has a LOT to do with it.
|
mobomofo
|
|
TonyE wrote:
Hey... great idea.
Five dollar a gallon for premium... hey! Let's bring in an inefficient sedan
|
If you're going to complain and whine about the price of gas, YOU HAVE NO BUSINESS PURCHASING A $70K CAR
|
Wizard
|
|
thepowerofhonda wrote:
So why does it have to be an inefficient sedan? The Corvette gets 28 MPG on the road and makes enormous HP. The reason is that it has a very tall top gear. I have often wondered why Honda (or any other car makers for that matter) does not uses the same principal with the bigger HP models. After all, it does not require 425 HP or even 200 HP to cruise at 75 MPH down the highway. Honda has chosen instead to use VMC. It clearly does not work as effectively as a very tall top gear on the Corvette.
|
Corvette might be getting good highway mileage but with the same engine (and 6MT), CTS-V didn't. Here's a comparison of the two (2007 models):
C6 (6.0-liter/6MT): 16/26
CTS-V (6.0/6MT): 14/22
What applies to a sports car doesn't necessarily translate to luxury sedans. That said, EPA ratings and the way they are measured doesn't take engine's power rating into account. It is not that a V8 powered Corvette is out-accelerating Aveo in the tests. The cars are all "driven" with same acceleration parameters, so power doesn't really play a role in EPA estimates.
Gearing does play a role, however, and especially with auto transmissions. Some automakers tend to be more aggressive (they often easily meet or beat EPA ratings in real life) versus others who seem to tailor gearing to excel in EPA ratings. You can see this in virtually any Honda/Acura. With 5AT, under 50 mph, the car will rarely (if at all) use the top gear. OTOH, there are other automakers that will force the top gear as soon as possible.
|
TonyEX
|
|
My wife has the hybrid, I think I finally talked her into getting the GX with the in house Phil.
myhui wrote:
Are you getting in line for the Civic GX? I am.
And they'll reward GX customers by letting them be first in line to buy the Clarity when it becomes widely available and gasoline is at $10/gallon.
|
|
80honda
|
|
thepowerofhonda wrote:
So why does it have to be an inefficient sedan? The Corvette gets 28 MPG on the road and makes enormous HP. The reason is that it has a very tall top gear. I have often wondered why Honda (or any other car makers for that matter) does not uses the same principal with the bigger HP models. After all, it does not require 425 HP or even 200 HP to cruise at 75 MPH down the highway. Honda has chosen instead to use VMC. It clearly does not work as effectively as a very tall top gear on the Corvette.
|
Talk to anyone with a Corvette, they have never seen anywhere near 28mpg in that tiny plastic hatchback.
|
TonyEX
|
|
The V6 MT6 Accord cruises at very low RPM on 6th gear.
CarPhreakD wrote:
...
As for why Honda doesn't utilize a very tall cruising gear- that is because they don't have a 6 speed auto tranny! Their 6 MTs are focussed on sport and are therefore close-ratio (justified), but I think that for the ATs Honda could probably get away with 5 closely spaced gears and one very tall one for highway cruising, since nobody really cares about sport in the AT models anyways... And Honda needs to refine VCM as well.
|
|
TonyEX
|
|
I've never believed in the need for a V8. It's heavier, bigger, etc...
I've always thought that the V6 was sufficient. If they need more power and/or torque then a set of DOHC iVTEC heads and/or an AT6 set up would be my answer.
Honda has always excelled at solving such issues via technology, not simple answers as adding displacement and burning more fuel.
CarShark wrote:
I take it that TonyE wasn't part of the huge outcry that I've always seen on this board of people wondering "Why doesn't the flagship have a V-8?" I agree that the V-8 won't be a big seller, but it's a big part of the luxury image, especially in America.
|
|
TonyEX
|
|
I don't believe those BMW numbers.
My neighbor has a 540i wagon and he told me he gets 14mpg max. He complained it's a guzzler.
CivicB18 wrote:
TonyE wrote:
Hey... great idea.
Five dollar a gallon for premium... hey! Let's bring in an inefficient sedan ( VCM or not...). (*)
Bring in the V8 at $70K, sell 5% of the RL with a V8 and then sell 95% of them with a 320bhp V6.
Oddly, it might work, such is the sheer stupidity of the marketing community, the car magazines and much of the consumer world.
(*) IMHO with the Odyssey's VCM, it kills performance. I'd rather have a proper two stage VTEC tuned for top end power than the lousy 2MPG that I may gain with VCM. In the RL, I think I'd rather have a DOHC iVTEC 3.2L V6 with a 7 speed transmission than 4.whatever V8 with VCM. Yawn...
|
The current RL isnt exactly a leader in fuel efficiency and its not what Id call a fast car by any means given the on paper power ratings. For the money you can get a Lexus GS350 AWD or a M35AWD that offer much better accleration with similar or better EPA ratings. Or you can spend a bit more and and get a 535Xi that will crush ANY RL in acceleration, deliver better EPA ratings. I know EPA ratings arent the best source but Im going to use them as a reference anyway.
EPA 6cyl / 6cyl AWD Ratings:
Acura RL: N/A AWD: 16/24
Lexus GS350: 19/27 AWD: 18/25
BMW 535i: 17/26 AWD: 17/25
Infiniti M35: 16/23 AWD: 16/22
Audi A6 3.2: 24 combined AWD: 22 combined
Mercedes E350: 17/24 AWD: N/A
Cadillac STS V6: 17/26 AWD: 17/26
This proposed/rumoured RL FR car with the V8 wouldnt have to be a true gas guzzler especially since Acura has expressed their concern about fuel efficiency. Id really like to see what Acura could do with a PROPER FR sport sedan. Some of the V8 sedan EPA ratings come close, mirror or better current RL V6 ratings.
EPA V8 ratings:
Acura RL: No V8 offered!
Lexus GS460: 17 city / 24 hwy
BMW 550i: 22 hwy
Infiniti M45: 16 city / 21 hwy
Audi A6 4.2 Quattro: 20 combined
Mercedes E550: 15 city / 22hwy
Cadillac STS V8: 15 city / 24 hwy
Id like to think that Acura would or could improve the VCM as its evident that it saps out midrange torque to a large degree. A 3.2L V6 wouldnt be at all competitive as the RL isnt exactly light weight and the competition offer some impressive 6 cylinder offerings. This car will need plentiful low/midrange torque accompanied by that signature VTEC top end and a nice 6 or 7 speed AT to be truly competitive. Give it at least a 3.5L V6 with some clever valvetrain technology, DI, a-Vtec and some other items.
I do however agree with you on fuel efficiency being a priority as gas is rediculously expensive, its about $3.30 here in central Ky for regular 87 oct. But to be considered a TRUE competitor you sometimes have to fight fire with fire and dismiss compromise.
~LP
|
|
Wizard
|
|
CarPhreakD wrote:
As for why Honda doesn't utilize a very tall cruising gear- that is because they don't have a 6 speed auto tranny!
|
6AT will help in spreading the gear ratio (i.e. increasing the gear span). Honda has delivered some relatively tall ratios with 5AT (Civic and RL are two examples). The "5AT" compromise costs them in low gear performance though as a good 5AT generally offers 4.5-5.0 gear span (shortest gear is about 4.5 to 5 times shorter than the tallest) compared to about 6.0 for a typical 6AT (or 7AT or 8AT).
Honda needs to go to 6AT and take that advantage, at least in Acuras. For example, they could leave the current top gear in RL at 2.21:1 (that is quite tall) and have a 13.26:1 first gear.
|
TonyEX
|
|
You are fundamentally missing the point of my email.
(1) Honda is a fuel efficient company. Always has been. It's expected to be so.
(2) Honda could make the RL powerful and efficient by using proper engine technology not just adding displacement.
(3) The money spent on development of a V8 is a waste from a Return On Investment point of view. They should put a high strung V8 in the NSX perhaps, but take the rest of the money and spend it on the next generation of V6s.
mobomofo wrote:
TonyE wrote:
Hey... great idea.
Five dollar a gallon for premium... hey! Let's bring in an inefficient sedan
|
If you're going to complain and whine about the price of gas, YOU HAVE NO BUSINESS PURCHASING A $70K CAR
|
|
CivicB18
|
|
TonyE wrote:
I don't believe those BMW numbers.
My neighbor has a 540i wagon and he told me he gets 14mpg max. He complained it's a guzzler.
CivicB18 wrote:
TonyE wrote:
Hey... great idea.
Five dollar a gallon for premium... hey! Let's bring in an inefficient sedan ( VCM or not...). (*)
Bring in the V8 at $70K, sell 5% of the RL with a V8 and then sell 95% of them with a 320bhp V6.
Oddly, it might work, such is the sheer stupidity of the marketing community, the car magazines and much of the consumer world.
(*) IMHO with the Odyssey's VCM, it kills performance. I'd rather have a proper two stage VTEC tuned for top end power than the lousy 2MPG that I may gain with VCM. In the RL, I think I'd rather have a DOHC iVTEC 3.2L V6 with a 7 speed transmission than 4.whatever V8 with VCM. Yawn...
|
The current RL isnt exactly a leader in fuel efficiency and its not what Id call a fast car by any means given the on paper power ratings. For the money you can get a Lexus GS350 AWD or a M35AWD that offer much better accleration with similar or better EPA ratings. Or you can spend a bit more and and get a 535Xi that will crush ANY RL in acceleration, deliver better EPA ratings. I know EPA ratings arent the best source but Im going to use them as a reference anyway.
EPA 6cyl / 6cyl AWD Ratings:
Acura RL: N/A AWD: 16/24
Lexus GS350: 19/27 AWD: 18/25
BMW 535i: 17/26 AWD: 17/25
Infiniti M35: 16/23 AWD: 16/22
Audi A6 3.2: 24 combined AWD: 22 combined
Mercedes E350: 17/24 AWD: N/A
Cadillac STS V6: 17/26 AWD: 17/26
This proposed/rumoured RL FR car with the V8 wouldnt have to be a true gas guzzler especially since Acura has expressed their concern about fuel efficiency. Id really like to see what Acura could do with a PROPER FR sport sedan. Some of the V8 sedan EPA ratings come close, mirror or better current RL V6 ratings.
EPA V8 ratings:
Acura RL: No V8 offered!
Lexus GS460: 17 city / 24 hwy
BMW 550i: 22 hwy
Infiniti M45: 16 city / 21 hwy
Audi A6 4.2 Quattro: 20 combined
Mercedes E550: 15 city / 22hwy
Cadillac STS V8: 15 city / 24 hwy
Id like to think that Acura would or could improve the VCM as its evident that it saps out midrange torque to a large degree. A 3.2L V6 wouldnt be at all competitive as the RL isnt exactly light weight and the competition offer some impressive 6 cylinder offerings. This car will need plentiful low/midrange torque accompanied by that signature VTEC top end and a nice 6 or 7 speed AT to be truly competitive. Give it at least a 3.5L V6 with some clever valvetrain technology, DI, a-Vtec and some other items.
I do however agree with you on fuel efficiency being a priority as gas is rediculously expensive, its about $3.30 here in central Ky for regular 87 oct. But to be considered a TRUE competitor you sometimes have to fight fire with fire and dismiss compromise.
~LP
|
|
540i wagon... as in the 4.4L 282hp version in the E39? I know that BMW will replace its current 4.8L 360hp (BMW 550i) V8 with a twin turbo 4.0L V8 with 400+hp and its supposed to be more efficient that the 4.8L currently offered. More power, more torque, and better efficiency...not bad.
GM will be getting rid of the Northstar V8's and, as I can see its only replacement would be a twin turbo DI DOHC 3.6 as the normally aspirated version is found in the Cadillac CTS, STS and other GM products. I do know that this engine was developed with turbocharging in mind. That should be a nice package. Ford/Lincoln have a V6 TT in the works also.
~LP
|
carcrazy84
|
|
| (2) Honda could make the RL powerful and efficient by using proper engine technology not just adding displacement. |
Tony, you know deep down the RL cannot be competitive without a V8. Its destined to be an also-ran without one, and Honda is finally acknowledging it, and not a moment too soon.
The V8 model could be made to fit Honda's philosophy, being offered as a hydrid only, allowing it to get similar mileage as the V6. This V8 could also be used in truck/SUV applications and perhaps even in the NSX successor. A V8 has the potential to be quite a money-maker. Just look at what it has done for Toyota and Nissan.
|
MasterOfDaDomain
|
|
Again the V8 is great news. Honda is an engine company to start with. Not having a V8 really hurts the image.
As important the V8 is, BMW has once again shown how things should be done in the age of increasing gas price - turbo. Is Honda working on a twin turbo, add to its V6? A twin turbo for the diesel?
Honda seems to have no answers for its competition in the high end models. The fuel economy of its models are no longer leading in their classes. It needs to advance the technologies in engine and transmission.
|
BalIermd
|
|
TonyE wrote:
You are fundamentally missing the point of my email.
(1) Honda is a fuel efficient company. Always has been. It's expected to be so.
(2) Honda could make the RL powerful and efficient by using proper engine technology not just adding displacement.
(3) The money spent on development of a V8 is a waste from a Return On Investment point of view. They should put a high strung V8 in the NSX perhaps, but take the rest of the money and spend it on the next generation of V6s.
mobomofo wrote:
TonyE wrote:
Hey... great idea.
Five dollar a gallon for premium... hey! Let's bring in an inefficient sedan
|
If you're going to complain and whine about the price of gas, YOU HAVE NO BUSINESS PURCHASING A $70K CAR
|
|
No, TonyE, I think you're missing the point. Anybody that's purchasing an RL or any car in this class is not that concerned with how fuel efficient the car is (or that Honda is a fuel efficient company). The whole point of a luxury car of this class is excess, overindulgence. And to some point, wastefulness. Sorry to have to break that news to you, but that's just the way it is. As Nate pointed out, there will always be a market for (gas greedy) luxury cars.
No, nobody really needs a V-8, they want them.
|
CivicB18
|
|
carcrazy84 wrote:
| (2) Honda could make the RL powerful and efficient by using proper engine technology not just adding displacement. |
Tony, you know deep down the RL cannot be competitive without a V8. Its destined to be an also-ran without one, and Honda is finally acknowledging it, and not a moment too soon.
The V8 model could be made to fit Honda's philosophy, being offered as a hydrid only, allowing it to get similar mileage as the V6. This V8 could also be used in truck/SUV applications and perhaps even in the NSX successor. A V8 has the potential to be quite a money-maker. Just look at what it has done for Toyota and Nissan.
|
Honda has already stated that all their hybrid vehicles would be small cars as large hybrids dont make much sense.
~LP
|
boomer
|
|
TonyE wrote:
Hey... great idea.
Five dollar a gallon for premium... hey! Let's bring in an inefficient sedan ( VCM or not...). (*)
Bring in the V8 at $70K, sell 5% of the RL with a V8 and then sell 95% of them with a 320bhp V6.
Oddly, it might work, such is the sheer stupidity of the marketing community, the car magazines and much of the consumer world.
(*) IMHO with the Odyssey's VCM, it kills performance. I'd rather have a proper two stage VTEC tuned for top end power than the lousy 2MPG that I may gain with VCM. In the RL, I think I'd rather have a DOHC iVTEC 3.2L V6 with a 7 speed transmission than 4.whatever V8 with VCM. Yawn...
|
Agreed. My GS350 V6 w/6AT gets great FE, a lot better than our 04s w/5ATs. 6, 7 and 8 ATs are extremely fuel efficient on V6s, and they are quick, not crazy fast, but very quick. V8s hold no interest for me; I just spent $80 to top off a V6 and an I4 which were not empty. $5.00 a gallon w/a V8? Forget about it.
|
TonyEX
|
|
I'm looking at this as Return On Investment.
The "problem" with the RL is not the lack of a V8. It's the TL.
Both cars are the same size and about the same power, yet the RL costs 12K more and offers only SH-AWD ( plus a much nicer body and interior ) as upgrades. The stereo in the TL is better to boot!
Many people don't see why they should spend 12K on getting AWD.
What the RL needs is a larger body. And perhaps a more powerful V6, something like 340bhp.
|
aznxthuggie
|
|
TonyE wrote:
I'm looking at this as Return On Investment.
The "problem" with the RL is not the lack of a V8. It's the TL.
Both cars are the same size and about the same power, yet the RL costs 12K more and offers only SH-AWD ( plus a much nicer body and interior ) as upgrades. The stereo in the TL is better to boot!
Many people don't see why they should spend 12K on getting AWD.
What the RL needs is a larger body. And perhaps a more powerful V6, something like 340bhp.
|
About ROI, you should know that some investments don't have direct benefits, especially a flagship sedan that is mainly built to promote the company's image. It's built to show the market that acura can still produce a superior vehicle. The indirect benefits of this vehicle (if it actually comes out in this form) will help acura further establish it's brand image in the luxury car market.
As far as the size/features between the TL/RL, this generation of the RL (even after this minor model change) is a old model. I really hope the next gen RL will be large and be able to compete with other company's flagships.
|
|
|
| |
![[home]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/home.gif){kind=small}
![[rumors and news]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/rumors.gif){kind=small}
![[model release matrix]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/newmodelreleasematrix.gif){kind=small}
![[dealer network]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/dealernet.gif){kind=small}
![[desktop calendar]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/calendar.gif){kind=small}
![[exhaust notes]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/exhaust.gif){kind=small}
![[tov forums]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/forums.gif){kind=small}
![[links]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/links.gif){kind=small}
![[search]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/search.gif){kind=small}
![[sponsors]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/sponsors.gif){kind=small}
![[garage]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/garage.gif){kind=small}
![[login]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/login.gif){kind=small}
