Add your comments
Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments.
When you enter your name and email address, you'll be sent a link to confirm your comment, and a password. To leave another comment, just use that password.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br> tags.
Please note that gratuitous links to your site are viewed as spam and may result in removed comments.










Reader Comments for
Subscribe to this threadAcura exec outlines future vehicle lineup
(Page 1 of 1)
John @ Sep 26th 2007 11:08AM
On the RL I say back to the future. The RL was better positioned as a front drive luxury car alternative to the LS Lexus. Yes - the original needed more power. So use the new V-6. An 8 or 10 cylinder engine with gas going sky high gives it in the same drawback of every big lux sedan. The new RL should have been three inches longer than the original with most of that space in the rear seat. A 300+ hp V-6 with a 7 speed trans and legitimate 28+ MPG, the bigger front seat of the original, a more open cabin (loose the huge console), a legit trunk like the original (the new one is smaller that a TL). In short a Real Luxury (RL) car with front drive, great power to weight ratio, and real world fuel economy. FINALLY - THE CAR SHOULD'NT REQUIRE THAT YOU READ THE BADGE TO DISTINGUISH IT FROM A TL. That car would sell.