I just finished visiting the Acura website and noticed that the RL has a V6 225 hp engine, almost identical to the TL, except for a slight difference in torque. I also noticed that the RL did not have much more passenger room than the TL. So what type of customer was Acura aiming for when they designed the RL? Who would rather pay $43,150 for and RL when they can buy a TL for $28,980?

And why would Honda let the 2003 Accord's V6 have 240 hp when the RL and TL only have 225?

And why does Acura think that $89,000 is a fair price to pay for the NSX, which has a 290 hp V6, when a Corvette Z06 has a 405 hp V8 for $51,000.

It seems as if Honda is starting to get away from the more for less concept.

 

All valid questions. Not only do I have a 2002 S2000 but I also have a 2002 TL Type S. 260 HP. It is a very nice automobile. Lots of power and luxury for the price. For the price of a NSX you can own 2 new automobiles.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by nastinupe1
[B]I just finished visiting the Acura website and noticed that the RL has a V6 225 hp engine, almost identical to the TL, except for a slight difference in torque.

 

RL will soon be re-designed with more room and power like the new MDX (larger motor for the new MDX, 3.7 liter, I think?)! May the RL will be pulled off the lines?

The new Accord has more power than before, but will not handle as well as the CL or the TL! (Plus CL and TL has more luxuries already! If you try to add similar luxuries and handling to the Accord, I think you'll be spend about the same or more money! And the looks too! (but that's just personal preference) Just compare Pilot with the MDX! Both have the similar powertrain and tranny - even the gear ratios are the same for all 5 speed- (but you can used regular gas on the Pilot Vs. 91+ on the MDX?)

 

I didn't realize that the NSX is handmade. Do you know if Honda has decided to put a V8 in the new NSX due out in 2004? If they can keep the price the same and push the horses up around 400, I would be very inpressed with the $90,000 sticker. But for $90,000 I think that I would have to go with a 99 F355.

Also, since the new Accord is about to be out in a month, when will the new CL and TL come out, 2004? If so, Acura is about to have a big face change. This will be interesting. I would like to see Acura push more agressive, more apealing cars. The TL-S is probably one of the best cars for the money. I think that it looks better than the G35 and the 330 cost too much. The ES300 looks like sh*t and the A6 is $10,000 more for basically the save package. But like I said eariler, it seems to me as if Honda should have changed both cars at the same time, like they did the Camry and ES. If the Camry would ave come out before the ES, the 2001 ES would have been killed by it's faternal twin.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by nastinupe1
[B]I didn't realize that the NSX is handmade.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by 850
[B]RL will soon be re-designed with more room and power like the new MDX (larger motor for the new MDX, 3.7 liter, I think?)! May the RL will be pulled off the lines?

 

Well... If I could afford a $90,000 sports car, it would probably be a weekend car anyway. I would probably only put 5000 miles a year on the car. But you are absolutely right about the cost of maintainence.

 

So I bet you didn't realize the S2000 is, to some extent, also hade made. BTW, both cars are made at the same plant in Japan.

 

just so people know. if you are doing a small run of cars it is cheaper to assemble them by hand.
Anyone else want to give me another excuse about why the NSX is worth 90k...i've heard em all..