(first posted 9/22/2017) Here’s an activity: name a mid-sized luxury sedan sold in North America during the 2005-12 period other than the pictured Acura RL. Did you think of one? Good. If you said anything other than the Volvo S80, then you named a car more popular with American buyers.
If you don’t have a German nameplate you are almost destined for also-ran status in the mid-size luxury segment. BMW, Mercedes-Benz and Audi dominate this segment, outselling the Japanese and American entrants by a considerable margin. But Acura has struggled more than others over the years.
Unlike the milquetoast first-generation RL, the second RL was engineered to have more of a sport sedan bent even though it was one of the few cars in its segment without standard rear-wheel-drive. Its Super Handling All-Wheel Drive (SH-AWD) afforded the car capable dynamics, “Super Handling” being a rather silly name for what was an impressive, torque-vectoring all-wheel-drive system.
While other Acuras used SH-AWD, the RL had a more complex version with a clutch/planetary gearset called an Acceleration Device. The RL’s SH-AWD could actively distribute the optimum amount of torque between the front and rear axles and between the left and right rear wheels. In fact, under hard cornering, 70 percent of available torque could be shifted to the rear wheels and 100 percent of this torque could be applied to the outside rear wheel.
The SOHC 3.5 V6 was quite gutsy with 300 hp at 6200 rpm and 260 ft-lbs at 5000 rpm, besting rival V6 engines in power. The engine also boasted a few Ward’s Best Engine awards to its name. The lone transmission offering was a five-speed automatic with paddle shifters, then relatively uncommon. A multi-link suspension set-up was used at the back, with double wishbones at the front. Curb weight was around 4000 pounds and fuel economy was an EPA-estimated 16/24 mpg, both figures around the same as those of an A6 Quattro. This meant the RL looked good on paper: more power than direct German rivals, a trick all-wheel-drive system, and competitive fuel economy.
On the road, the RL followed through. Automotive journalists were impressed with the RL’s refinement and surprisingly capable, sure-footed handling. In a 2005 Car & Driver comparison test, the RL lost only to the Infiniti M in a field of eight. Edmunds ranked it first and Motor Trend second in shootouts against German and Japanese rivals. There were awards, too: a Car & Driver 10Best and CNET’s Tech Car of the Year. Clearly, Acura was onto something with the RL and the executives at Honda had to just sit back and wait for the sales to come flying in.
They waited. And waited. Sure, there was an initial surge – to 17,572 units in 2005 – but the RL began to hemorrhage sales, down to 6,262 in 2007 and continuing to fall thereafter. It was even selling worse than its unpopular and inferior predecessor which, in turn, had sold far worse than its predecessor, the Legend. Although the Legend had sold as many as 70k units back in the late 1980s, the first-generation RL sold only in the teens due to a higher base price, a sedan-only range, as well as Acura re-centering its range around the new, cheaper TL and CL models.
The removal of the Legend name in North America had cost Acura crucial name recognition and equity. Perhaps the RL might have been on more luxury car buyers’ shopping lists had it worn the old name, even if the Acura brand still lacked the cachet and prestige of the Germans. Perhaps the RL would have been more popular, too, if it didn’t have such anonymous styling. It’s not that the RL was unattractive – it was handsome in an inoffensive way – but it lacked any kind of visual drama or presence. It was derided by many as looking like an Accord which, while fairly inaccurate, is a rather damning critique of a luxury sedan, one scarcely made of the second-generation Legend.
The biggest threat to the RL came from Acura’s own showroom. The Acura TL was cheaper, more distinctively styled, almost as large. The fourth-generation TL, introduced in 2009, was even available with the same engine and a version of the SH-AWD (although, worryingly, its sales had slid dramatically too).
The RL’s competitive set wasn’t standing still, either. By 2009, the Germans and Infiniti were introducing seven-speed automatic transmissions. There was a new Cadillac CTS, the new Jaguar XF, as well as the first Hyundai Genesis and the Lincoln MKS. The RL could handle well, yes, but so could any number of its rivals and many of them had more power, features and efficiency. The progress in the segment in just a few years could be seen even in 0-60 times: with a time of 7.3 seconds, the RL went from being competitive in 2005 to being “slow” in 2008. Or try fuel economy: Audi’s supercharged V6, new for 2009, produced the same power as the RL but with more torque and better fuel economy.
Acura freshened the RL in 2009 with the controversial “power plenum” grille and a larger 3.7 V6, which produced an extra 10 pound-feet of torque. This helped fix a commonly cited deficit in low-end torque, but lowered fuel economy to 16/22 mpg. A six-speed automatic was belatedly added in 2011, which boosted fuel economy beyond even the original 3.5 (17/24 mpg). But none of these changes salvaged sales.
The angular and striking new grille looked incongruous with the RL’s gentle curves and was hurriedly toned down in 2011. The interior was scarcely changed and, while its design was still distinctive, its silver plastic trim was looking rather passé by the 2010s.
The RL/Legend was even less popular in Australia—at $AUD74,500, the Legend was 63% more expensive than a top-of-the-line Accord V6, even if it did undercut base model 5-Series and E-Class sedans by thousands of dollars. As in North America, it came exceptionally well-equipped but it had an eye-popping price for something with a Honda badge on it. Consequently, used examples are few and far between and dizzying depreciation has made these roaring good buys.
On a more personal note, for my past three car purchases, I’ve considered a used Legend. Each time I haven’t pulled the trigger, despite these cars’ horrible residual values working very much in my favor. I loved the Legend’s high-quality, modern interior, and I was encouraged by its reliability. And for me, a V6 engine was enough—I didn’t need a V8.
But what eliminated the Legend from contention each time was arguably its strongest attribute: the SH-AWD system. All-wheel-drive is unnecessary where I live, where it literally doesn’t snow. While I appreciate the traction and superior handling it affords, I was concerned, justifiably or not, about the additional complexity and higher parts, maintenance and fuel costs. Granted, my thought process as a cheapskate used car buyer differs from that of a new luxury car buyer, but my experience underscores one of the RL’s deficiencies. There was no cheaper RL or more powerful RL or non-AWD RL. There was one drivetrain, take it or leave it.
The 2009 Legend had less of a beak than the 2009 RL
Where the Legend fell down in the Australian market (and in Europe, for that matter) could be chalked up to hubris, that Honda thought they could sell a sedan with the Honda logo for E-Class money. It was only slightly more reasonable for Honda to expect an Acura to sell for similarly BMW-level pricing in North America.
Honda may have beaten Toyota and Nissan to the punch with its own luxury brand but it made a series of mistakes for which it is still paying today. Where Lexus and Infiniti went high, Acura settled for a near-luxury/premium price point. Where Lexus and Infiniti introduced rear-wheel-drive models targeted directly at the Germans, Acura settled for Accord-derived, front-wheel-drive models like the TL. Whether they realized it at the time or not, Toyota and Nissan had planned for a future where mainstream brands could introduce highly-specified, pricier trim levels. They saw the only way to be spoken of in the same breath as the Germans was to play them at their own game.
Today, Acura leans heavily on its crossovers. It’s struggling to convince shoppers to pick the TLX over the almost equally impressive Honda Accord, while the RL’s replacement, the RLX, is selling just as poorly as the RL did and losing big time to American, Japanese, European and now Korean rivals. The RLX also repeated the RL’s mistake of looking too conservative.
The RL was always going to be handcuffed by a lack of name recognition and a lack of brand prestige. Add in anonymous styling and BMW-level pricing, internal competition, a slightly cramped cabin and the lack of an optional, larger engine and it was doomed to fail.
Related Reading:
Curbside Classic: 1999 Acura 3.0 CL – Too Well-Rounded?
Curbside Classic: 1995 Acura Legend L Coupe – Legends Never Die
Will second that the TL did the RL no favors sitting in the same showroom. In 2005 my parents much preferred the TL A-Spec over the RL, and chose the former.
Also, Acura isn’t North America only, as they are sold in China as well. They even have a unique model, the CDX crossover:
Ah, yes, I forgot about Acura’s Chinese presence and amended the text. From memory though, I don’t think they’re hugely popular there (yet). In fact, I think the Japanese luxury brands live in the shadow of the Germans in China much like they do in North America. Correct me if I’m wrong.
I did a little digging. Last year they sold 9,062 cars, so you are right, not popular yet. I admit I am not fully versed in the full scope of Chinese/Japanese cultural relations, but I am aware they are tense, so that isn’t such a surprise regarding market position. I did however discover that there is a new this year China only TLX-L long wheelbase model now (still made in Marysville, Ohio). I think it looks better than ours, and it seems to show Acura wants to be a serious player in China:
That’s their problem, they’re importing their cars so they’re going to be loaded with tariffs. And from what I can see, they’ve been there since at least 2012. So if they want to make any real headway, they need to start assembling their cars in China.
That is a very good point I really did not think of. That said, I do know the CDX is made there, so maybe a plan is in place? Hard to say, really…
Joint ventures are how to sell cars in China, just build them there.
Acuras looked so much better before they started beaking all of them. Luckily they have been backing away from the beak in the newer models
I do like the new grille on the MDX, but on the TLX, I think the initial front end looked better. By the mid-00’s the Power Plenum grill had been toned down, contoured and massaged enough to look rather attractive. The new grilles a la Audi/Lexus are too generic and gaping for my tastes.
I am aware of more than one person who was turned off by that beak. It was such an odd way of trying to differentiate their product, and it looked tacky.
Not surprisingly, the aftermarket offered traditional grilles to replace the “cowcatcher” on Acuras.
Always a bridesmaid indeed! Acura has had its struggles over the past few decades since its stellar first decade, and I think no other car exemplifies the brand’s shortcomings than the RL and now RLX.
I sound like a broken record saying this, but I know most agree, Acura never should have dropped the “Legend” name in North America, as it had such a high level of equity.
These ’05 RLs were actually pretty common in my area in their first couple of years, being a major improvement in looks, luxury, and performance over the 1996-2004 RL. As time went on though, the RL became stale and its looks became generic.
As you correctly state, the 2009 TL essentially rendered the RL nonessential in Acura’s lineup, offering most of the same features, the same powertrain and SH-AWD, and more imposing styling for a significantly lower price. The RL’s “tweener status”, being a flagship, yet E-Class/5 Series/GS size confused things even more.
I will say that the 2009 facelift with the “power plenum” grille actually improved the design in my opinion, and the final 2011-12 facelifted examples were the prettiest of the bunch. I’d easily have bought a pre-owned RL in 2012 instead of the TSX if it had been within my price range.
Agreed on your last point. The 2009 facelift made these so much more distinctive and the 2011-12 were the best-looking of the bunch. The 2005-08 are just too plain, the styling puts me to sleep.
I’m not sure that one can underestimate the power of the Legend model name.
Acura made a Lincoln-esque move by replacing its model names (Legend, Vigor, Integra) with two-letter monikers, and just as with Lincoln, thoroughly confused buyers.
On a side note, I always wondered if “RL” was purposely chosen to evoke the cachet of Polo designer Ralph Lauren.
You’re exactly right about the value and cachet of “Legend,” as Acura is on record stating it was concerned that its model names (with Integra not far behind) overshadowed market perception of the overall brand.
In hindsight they may have been better off renaming the entire brand Legend.
Lincoln brought back the Continental name, so there is hope that Acura may bring back the Legend.
So their solution was to trash the powerful model names and introduce new ones even less distinctive than the overall brand. Just brilliant.
Honda Motor really lost its shit after Soichiro Honda died in ’91.
Another well-written, comprehensive piece, Will. You touched on all the things that came to my mind: losing “Legend” for “RL”; that Acura, formerly a pioneer, had become an also-ran; and the styling. While I like the looks of the featured car, I think the only truly attractive Acura I can think of from the past decade or so is the third-generation TL introduced for ’04.
I’ve always admired the 2005-2008 RL, though I’ve never driven one and they were priced outside my price range. Perhaps the RL was too plain and Accord-like in styling to be successful, but from what I’ve heard, the few people who bought one ended up loving it. The 2009 facelift was unfortunate.
I worked with a guy who had an 04 TL. During one of its transmission replacements he got an RL as a dealer courtesy car.
He really liked it but I had a hard time understanding the price premium. Yes, it was a little bigger, somewhat more powerful and with some added features, but it did not have the kind of presence that a car in that price class needs.
And about the engine. I don’t care how much power it put out, trying to sell a 3.5L V6 at that price was suicide. “”Isn’t that the Honda minivan engine?” Until Honda gets out of its V6/FWD mindset it will never make it in the big kid league.
The problem is that Honda is not a large company, when compared to other automobile manufacturers around the globe.
Investing in a rear-wheel-drive platform and unique engines for Acuras could require reduced investment in the Civic, CR-V, Accord and Odyssey. Those are the vehicles that pay the bills at Honda.
It’s the same with Ford. Ford isn’t going to reduce investment in the F-series to pay for a rear-wheel-drive platform reserved for Lincoln. Particularly when GM did follow that path for Cadillac, with lackluster results. I’m sure that Honda (and Ford) officials have been closely studying the sales figures of the Cadillac ATS, CTS and CT6. The Cadillacs aren’t bad vehicles, but they don’t appear to be getting many people out of their BMWs and Benzes.
Given that Acura hasn’t had any trouble selling its crossovers, it probably makes more financial sense to keep them competitive, and simply offer sedans based on Honda platforms.
Audi has managed quite well indeed without any RWD platforms.
V8 engines are quickly going the way of the dodo bird. The new S Class is primarily V6 powered. The cylinder count is becoming irrelevant, as long as it’s powerful and smooth enough.
A nice, comprehensive look at an overlooked vehicle.
I liked the styling of these cars, but they always struck me as Honda’s version of the 1967-74 Imperial. Namely, a vehicle that its maker was trying to sell in the luxury class, but only appealed to people who wanted a super-deluxe version of the parent company’s less expensive offerings.
The Imperial appealed to people who wanted the ultimate Chrysler New Yorker. These RLs appealed to people who wanted the ultimate Honda Accord. That ultimately wasn’t enough to play in this market.
From a styling standpoint, this would have made a better 2008-2012 Accord than the one Honda did sell us. But that’s ultimately part of this car’s problem, too.
Image is why Acura is not considered ‘true luxury’ in the US. Axing the Legend name was one mistake.
Other is not really Acura’s fault, but all the loud exhaust, modded, [many badly] old Integra’s gave the brand a “kiddie toy” car image.
Another is average people think of it as “Honda Acura”, or a top trim version of Accord.
I worked in an automotive related job in Australia in 2010 which allowed me to drive a huge variety of brand new vehicles. Some I loved, one or two I hated and there were some – like the S Class and Lexus which I didn’t like but do recall as being very impressive in their own way.
The Legend? Forgettable – my main memory is of one of the Kiwi staff managing to pronounce the word with no discernible vowel sounds.
I came close to buying an RL of this generation a couple years ago. As noted in the article, these are a screaming deal right now, selling at lower prices than TLs of equivalent age/mileage. While the exterior styling is very dull and Accord-esque, the interior materials are top notch. SH-AWD is no joke; this is a big heavy front wheel drive car that handles more like a small sports car. Also good acceleration, and an awesome stock stereo. Similar to William, I was put off by potential maintenance costs. Flagship sedans are just plain expensive to maintain (even Lexus and Acura).
I’m curious: what quantitative data do we have on the Legend name being so awesome? After controlling for the product quality and brand reputation. Because everyone seems to have a giant erection for the Legend name, and to me it’s starting to sound like urban legend. I’d love to see some figures on the Legend name separate from the fact that Acura was a hot brand with great product. Because the TL went on to greatness as it did, I’m skeptical that all it took was the absence of the Legend nameplate to doom the car.
It is an urban legend, IMHO, and a very annoying one at this point. Legend sales slid about 70% from 1991 to 1995. The 1996 RL sold even worse, but the difference wasn’t as drastic. Look on Wikipedia for the sales figures.
It’s hardly an urban legend, Mnbska and MT. And you’ll note I didn’t say it was the ONLY reason the RL sold worse than the Legend, as I mentioned higher prices, the loss of a coupe variant, and the brand repositioning more around the CL and TL.
Legend sales were declining, yes, probably due to tougher competition and higher prices because of the exchange rate. But other than its final year (which coincided with the introduction of the RL, so naturally sales would slip), the Legend’s worst year was around 35,000 units. The first-gen RL’s best year was 1997 with 16,000 units. And sales almost completely collapsed after 1999.
Call it an urban legend all you want, MT, but I very clearly stated it wasn’t the only reason RL sales were down from Legend’s. And I posed it as a theory for why the second-generation RL sold so poorly even though it was much improved over its predecessor. So all this talk of “erections” for the Legend name and “annoying” urban legends is a bit off-base. I’d like to think I gave a more well-rounded argument than the usual, “Wahhhh the RL name sucks why isn’t it called Legend” complaint.
And Mnbska, I’m puzzled by the last sentence of your post, “Because the TL went on to greatness as it did, I’m skeptical that all it took was the absence of the Legend nameplate to doom the car.” Did you mean the RL?
My last sentence means to say that the Vigor turned into the TL, and the TL took off. But many people (just a sampling in this comment section alone) posit the reason for the RL’s decline (and Acura’s decline) in the US was because they dropped names like the Legend.
I believe that’s a red herring. If the TL can succeed despite not being a Vigor anymore, than that disproves the theory that the name change doomed the full size Acura. The TSX, NSX and TSX did just fine, as well. This is why I disagree that “The removal of the Legend name in North America had cost Acura crucial name recognition and equity.” Because the other cars did fine, we need other quantitative data to make that conclusion.
And I was not only replying to you, but 5 other commenters here who also ignore that the CTS, STS, DTS, MX-5 and MKX etc have all done just fine after a name change. Yes, there was brand equity in the prior names. But not enough to make a real difference because, as you say, there were a thousand other things at work.
On any article about any Acura I scroll to the inevitable “if they only kept the Legend name” comments. If it’s not an urban legend, it’s certainly an inaccurate meme.
Except the Vigor was a huge flop. It sold worse than the 1G RL! So nobody was upset the name was gone. Hell, a lot of people probably didn’t know what the Vigor was.
As for your other examples:.
STS and DTS sold worse than their predecessors.
MKX and NSX and MDX were entirely new lines that didn’t replace existing models.
You typed TSX twice, I presume you meant TLX the second time. And it should be selling better considering it replaced TWO model lines, TL and TSX
Considering it was one of/the only inexpensive roadsters on the market with a strong niche following, I don’t think the MX-5 is a great example for your argument.
My argument wasn’t about alphanumeric names. It was about getting rid of established names. Your examples really don’t support your argument. Is there specific data that shows how much of an effect the RL name change had? Maybe. Maybe there’s some old market research out there. But until either of us see it, I feel my theory is valid.
FYI, a good site for car sales data is carsalesbase.com
In Acura’s defense, the RL was originally supposed to be replaced with (or at least accompanied by) a V8, RWD car in the early 2010s as part of their “Tier 1” project. There was also supposed to be a V10 NSX. Alas, both projects were killed during the recession, and all that came of Acura’s “Tier 1” project were the 2009 TL and 2010 ZDX. Yes, they were ugly, but the recession really did them in – they were in the wrong place at the wrong time.
http://www.autonews.com/article/20080811/OEM04/308119984/acura-aspires-to-join-tier-1-luxury-brands
V8 and RWD isnt how Honda build cars, better handling FWD cars than Hondas are quite easy to find and without the 4WD bullshit Honda had to use to try to make their effort steer at speed, Audi does it quite well, Citroen does it far better and with self leveling thrown in for free, try one youd never shop Japanese ever again.
I’m also genuinely surprised that the RL actually outsold the Volvo S80: the S80 seems more common, but then again, a 2016 S80 doesn’t look radically different from a 1999 and especially a 2007. I felt like it was made forever with few stylistic changes.
Generally, the S80 outsold the RL in Canada. Just not in North America. And you’re right, the S80 had fewer visual changes and a stronger design lineage with its predecessor.
This is a car i owned a few years ago and considered it one of my favorite ever (after owning some 8 combined Legends and RLs of the previous two generations). Mine was a ragged out hooptie i bought for $950 and put many many trips to the junkyard and hours of painstaking care into restoring in the way Kyree has written about his Jaguars – at the end it was a stunning car and the AWD system, always impressive in it’s sporting nature, never gave me a lick of trouble and this in a car with 263,000 miles, and the Bose system was the best ive encountered to this day.
The TL was indeed too similar in size and capability and had the advantage of being refreshed earlier even before the nearly RL aping final generation came out and the subtle features like the higher quality interior and Japanese assembly usually shone through long term ownership and not on a test drive.
Their value proposition does make these far cheaper than TLs and even TSXs though – I’d love to have one again some day
I’m similarly taken with my Honda Legend KB1.
Mine has the 17″ wheels and we got something similar to A-Spec suspension, so the handling is even better. People tell me it rides very well too, but I’m not entirely convinced. Probably compared to German rubbish, yes.
Breakdowns in a decade? Well, the HFT stopped working, so I now have to talk in a fake American accent so that the replacement Acura module will understand me. Oh, and an interior door handle cable fell off. TADT,S. And the active noise cancellation fried the driver’s door speaker in the end.
The combination of an ultra-luxury car and a Subaru WRX is bonkers, but suits my driving style perfectly. It’s even unflappable on black ice.
I simply don’t want another car.
Disclaimer: I’ve got a severe case of chronic Honditis anyway…
Back then I test drove a late-model used RL and might have bought it had the front seats been more comfortable. Also did not like what sounded like a booming noise coming from the noise cancellation system. But the AWD and feeling of driving what felt like a RWD-based AWD system, even though it was FWD-based, made the car a joy to drive, as did its balance. compactness and light steering. But those seats! Was the same reason I didn’t buy a Honda Crosstour. My dream car from Honda would have been an Acura RL based on the Crosstour and with more comfortable front seats.