GTP Cool Wall: 2007-2008 Acura TL Type-S

2007-2008 Acura TL


  • Total voters
    120
  • Poll closed .
4,209
United States
Wasilla, AK
2007-2008 Acura TL Type-S nominated by Mikeybc

7A4DF593-E427-4D7D-99B5-9A8578E7FF02_zpspiudczwv.jpg


Stats:
Production: 2007-2008
Style: 4-door sedan
Engine: 212 ci/3,471 cc naturally aspirated DOHC V6 (rated 286 HP & 256 lb-ft)
Transmission: 6-speed manual
Layout: Front-engine, Front-drive
Related: Honda Accord​
 
Last edited:
That was easy. It's an Accord in drag. An Accord is barely ever cool, unless it's a Euro-R... and rebadging it and stuffing it with better leather isn't going to have a positive effect on that... at all.

Would've given it an uncool, but I like that motor.
 
These things look so nice, very nice interior as well.

Just wish the transmission was more reliable.
 
Hard to feel anything for a car based on a US Accord. With styling based on the Acura TSX. Which itself is a rebadged Japan/EU market Accord. Which is actually a pretty sound car with a likeable design.

Meh. Non of them were cool by any stretch, but the designs were alright. And the TL looked much better than its US Accord stablemate.
 
There are cars made for speed, there are those with luxury as a need.

Then, there's this, made in the East, not really impressing me to the least.

V6 engine and a front wheel drive isn't for me; a nice block shouldn't be confined like thee.

And it goes away, to be seriously uncool; because it is as follow with the rule.
 
I've never really thought, "y'know what's a cool car? An Acura TL".

I'm sure they're great (the Accord they're based on is pretty good as it is) but doesn't meet any definition of cool, really.

Nor is it hateful enough to deserve a "seriously" and ultimately it moves people around in relative style and luxury, so regular uncool for this one.
 
Doesn't say anything to me. As I'm seeing from responses it's a rebadged Accord and I like the Accords. Boring saloon but it's somewhat appealing. Meh.
 
Seriously Uncool.

A very 'bleh' fwd car that outclassed by rwd rivals. (Lexus IS, Caddy CTS, G35, 3-Series)
 
It's a fancy Honda. The engineerers were so lazy they didn't even give it RWD, which is what Infiniti and Lexus have. Uncool.
 
It's a fancy Honda. The engineerers were so lazy they didn't even give it RWD, which is what Infiniti and Lexus have. Uncool.
You mean, the engineers were so lazy they didn't entirely re-engineer the selected front-wheel drive platform at a cost of billions of dollars, unlike Infiniti and Lexus who designed their own dedicated rear-wheel drive platforms for their respective models?

That's be the slightly more accurate, slightly less myopic take on it.
 
You mean, the engineers were so lazy they didn't entirely re-engineer the selected front-wheel drive platform at a cost of billions of dollars, unlike Infiniti and Lexus who designed their own dedicated rear-wheel drive platforms for their respective models?

That's be the slightly more accurate, slightly less myopic take on it.

You voted uncool as well, what's your point?

And I'm pretty sure it doesn't cost billions of dollars just to develop an FR drivetrain.
 
It's a fancy Honda. The engineerers were so lazy they didn't even give it RWD, which is what Infiniti and Lexus have. Uncool.

Infiniti, which used to sell this:
1200px-2002G20%287%29.JPG


and this:
Infiniti--I35.jpg


and now sells this:
new-2014-infiniti-qx60-fwd4dr-10212-11765847-1-640.jpg


Or Lexus which sells this:
Lexus-ES-350-Exterior-SilverLiningMetallic-17SixSpokeAlloy.jpg

(direct competitor... and very successful, despite being a long-wheelbase Camry)

and this:
1200px-LEXUS_CT200h_Japan_2011_front.JPG


and this:
1200px-2009-2010_Lexus_RX_350_%28GGL15R%29_Sports_Luxury_wagon_01.jpg


While, yes, Acura's reluctance to develop rear-wheel drive platforms to compete is part of the reason why they're not highly regarded, Audi has shown that a FWD-based model line-up is not necessarily a death-knell in the luxury market. What matters is that people perceive it as premium. And that's where Acura has failed. They simply don't differentiate themselves enough from Hondas to make people care.

Acura's failure is 50% crappy aesthetics and 50% terrible marketing and planning. It has very little to do with the cars being front-wheel drive.

-----

Acura has no rear-drive platforms or engines designed for rear-wheel drive. Engine and transmission development alone could cost half-a-billion (Hyundai's V8 program supposedly cost them $450 million. Just for the engine), so $1b total is not unthinkable. This is not the kind of cost they can spread out across the Honda range, since the Honda brand doesn't sell any rear-wheel drive vehicles. At least, not anymore.
 
You voted uncool as well, what's your point?
My point is that not entirely re-engineering a car doesn't make engineers "lazy", it means they have a budget. Aside from bragging rights RWD is largely irrelevant in a car like that anyway - it's not like people buying compact executive cars routinely drive everywhere like Keiichi Tsuchiya.

As for my vote, that's irrelevant. People are free to vote what they wish, but justifying it with irrelevant dross is objectionable.

Voting it uncool because it's a fancy Honda is therefore fair enough. Somehow justifying it by saying lazy engineers didn't make it rear-drive is arse-gravy.
 
The original one was built primarily as a Honda. The next one might be sold as an Acura in more markets, though.

Beyond that, the question is whether they'll ever feel the need to create a bespoke midsized/fullsized sedan platform. Which they probably won't.


But like I said: the front-wheel drive underpinnings are not the handicap most people think they are. Better marketing and product planning could overcome that. As it is, no matter how good the products are, they're suffering from a huge image problem.
 
Back