Author Topic: '96 Acura RL vs '97 Camry XLE (Read 1644 times)

cwl · « **on:** June 12, 2005, 08:47:31 am »

I'm still looking for a good used car and want some more advice from the group. I've driven a couple of cars that seem reasonable and both in good condition. The '96 Acura RL has the 3.5l engine, full load incl leather and about 80,000 km. The Camry has the 3l engine, fully loaded except for the leather and about 90,000 km. The asking price for both is basically the same and I am wondering which of these you would recommend and if there are any issues with either model I should be aware of.

Thanks for your help once again.

hondasalesguy · « **Reply #1 on:** June 12, 2005, 12:34:34 pm »

The RL was a much more expensive car new than the Camry was. It will also be a bit more powerful and quieter. Could be more expensive to repair/service though. Reliability on both vehicles is very good.

articsteve · « **Reply #2 on:** June 13, 2005, 01:57:16 am »

which of these you would recommend and if there are any issues with either model I should be aware of.

The Acura with no hesitation.

Toyota said it will pay for sludge-related repairs for eight years from the date of purchase for all 1997-2002 Toyota and Lexus vehicles with the 3.0-liter IMZ V-6 engine

CWL; Does the above-mentioned quote help you decide? 97 Camry is a dull boring unit with potential sludge in the motor.

sirAQUAMAN64 · « **Reply #3 on:** June 13, 2005, 10:46:55 am »

At the same cost I would take the Acura as well. Dang, that's depreciation!

But bear in mind that as HSG said servicing and maintenance costs might be higher. Still, much more luxurious car

johngenx · « **Reply #4 on:** June 13, 2005, 12:01:16 pm »

Acura, handsdown. The V-6 Camry is no less expensive to service, not much easier on gas, and not nearly as nice a car as the RL. The RL is a WAY better deal, price-wise.

cwl · « **Reply #5 on:** June 14, 2005, 09:18:58 pm »

Thanks everyone for your comments. My wife (who will drive this every day) likes the Camry better but I will try to convince her otherwise and this will help. If not we will continue looking. I have also been driving a couple of 2001 Accord LX's that seem quite nice. Neither of them have the leather or all the gadgets the RL has but nice none the less to drive. Both have about 85K and the asking prices are identical at $16K plus both taxes of course.

Any thoughts on the Accords?

Thanks
CL

hondasalesguy · « **Reply #6 on:** June 14, 2005, 09:26:15 pm »

The difference is buying a 5 year newer car with less toys on it, less luxury vs a car that is almost 10 years old but was a premium purchase in its day.