$10,000 below sticker for RL?

[Osiris_x11]

RL for $39,995... the best brand-new car in the world, period!

Would it still have Torque Steer?

I think it would.

Hence why I asked earlier about the power distribution between the front & rear axle's w/o the AWD system engaged or actively working.

I need to read up on the BMW (iX) & MB (4Matic) AWD systems; see the power distribution on their respective axles, as in their 2WD form their engineering was based on a RWD platform.

 

[Ojas]

Re: FWD w/ AWD capability...?!?

What's the power distribution between the front & rear axles of the '05 RL, when AWD isn't active per'se...

It is 70% front and 30% rear normally, but can go from this distribution to 30% front and 70% rear. Between the rear wheels, it can vary the torque split completely: 0-100%.

FWD [this]... AWD [that]... RWD [the other]...

Not long ago, Juice posted an excellent article that covers what differentiates the SH-AWD system from other AWD systems: http://www.nsxprime.com/forums/showpost.php?p=479056&postcount=54

One part that caught my attention is how the rear wheels are spun faster than the fronts in a turn. Under normal conditions in a normal car, the fronts and rears spin at about the same rate in a turn (actually the rears will spin slightly slower since they track a slightly smaller radius than the fronts). If you are in a car that is "pushing" when going through a turn (like almost all FWD cars), the fronts are probably spinning faster than the rears.

In order to get some understanding of the SH-AWD system, one has to ask the question "What happens if the rears wheels are spinning faster than the front?" This would mean the rears are tracking a larger radius than the fronts. Imagine a car going in a circle - the only way this would be possible is if the car is pointed into the turn (yaw is inward, just like slight oversteer). This, of course, is what most RWD cars do when taking a turn at speed.

To me, it seems to be a very high-tech AWD system - definitely different than others and could hardly be classified as the same as FWD. Besides, you could say "Yeah, my car has torque-vectoring." Say it out loud - it sounds cool.

 

[Hothonda]

It could set the friggin record for the 'Ring and still not come up on my radar screen, because it's an automatic. I want to be involved in the drive, and an automatic kills that.

Face it....the RL is not the car for you..goodbye!

 

[Dave Hardy]

Face it....the RL is not the car for you..goodbye!

I agree! My original post on the topic was "M3 to RL makes no sense at all to me."

 

[JonBoy]

Dave Hardy - isn't your CLK an automatic?

 

[Dave Hardy]

That wasn't my CLK. I was hired by AMG as an instructor at a driving school. That was just some "extracurricular" fun. I absolutely loved the torque of the big AMG engines, but the automatics sucked.

 

[NsSeX]

I'm sure that the RL is more reliable than an M3, but still. In my mind, the RL is a glorified accord and is in no way on par with the M3.

yes the RL is no where near on par with the M3. And Liftshard for your Info the M3 is/has been more reliable and has much better build quality than my last acura and my last honda :wink:

Currently I'm just trying to decide if I want something more toned down(?) that can be used as a daily year round unlike the M3 when once it snows (for about a week at the most?) , I can't get out of my drive way :biggrin:

But then again I hear the NSX bug calling me 24/7 and it's just driving me nuts :frown: :biggrin: If I could find a NSX that I really like that's close and a great deal with it, i'll be all over the NSX!!

I know it sounds stupid, but the reason why I can't seem stop complaining about my M3 is because I made the stupid mistake of trading my NSX in for it :redface: Other than that, it's a great car that is very RELIABLE

 

[NsSeX]

Would it still have Torque Steer?

The RL doesn't have enough power to have Torque steer :biggrin:

Also I did think about the M3 to RL trade and realized that I really wasn't going to trade in the M for a RL