solara or Acura 3.2 cl Type "S"

by **CrazyCraig** » Mon Jun 30, 2003 11:33 am

Your maintenance costs are going to go way up if you buy to the Acura.

by **p-phunck** » Mon Jun 30, 2003 12:50 pm

stay with your solara...tl's and cl's are having tranny problems like everyone is stating...

solara = less headache and wallet ache
cl = big headacheS and wallet acheS

by **cdssolara** » Mon Jun 30, 2003 1:34 pm

If you're keeping the Solara mostly stock, it will probably be more reliable. I have a lot of performance mods on my Solara, and though I like what they've done for the car, they've added a lot of squeaks and clunks that the car never had in stock form. You can get a lot of the same benefits with a CL S, especially with the 6 speed that includes LSD. I understand you can add a supercharger that will really kick up the horsepower on that car. The beauty is that all the stock performance equipment is under warranty, unlike a lot of the bolt-on stuff that we put on our Solaras. I hadn't heard about all the tranny problems with the TL and CL, and that sounds pretty disturbing. Overall, though, I'd still make the trade and go with the Acura.

By the way, there was an interesting article in the June (I think) issue of Car & Driver about a supercharged CL S with a lot of other upgrades. I think it had 360 hp with less than 5 psi of boost. The point of the article was that it was a great car, but a lot of that power was wasted due to it's being fwd.

by **raqdim** » Mon Jun 30, 2003 3:50 pm

Thank you guys for all your comments. I appreciated it so much. I'll keep you informed regarding my decision.
Thanks again.

by **Missay** » Mon Jun 30, 2003 4:06 pm

Just going by looks, not reliabilty...I'm still sorta torn towards the solara.

I **almost** bought a 99 or 00 3.0 CL (type S?? I forget the exact model) from one of my mother's friends a couple weeks before I bought the solara. In the end, I'm glad I went for the solara, cause when ever I see the Cls on the road the sorta look funny to me. The back is sorta clumsy, and the lines don't flow like the solara.

It's the acura name that appealed mostly to me. I bet if it were a Lexus solara, more people would buy it...I'm not even joking, a name "adds" to a car.

I haven't taken any Acura/Honda roadside assistance calls for almost a year now, but I do remember putting the "317" code in a lot more for the towing disablement on Acura/Honda calls than other calls.

317=transmission

by **hari-bhari** » Mon Jun 30, 2003 4:47 pm

The back is sorta clumsy, and the lines don't flow like the solara

couldn't have said it better myself. the back IS sort of ugly, with and without the spoiler.

Website · by **DavPak** » Tue Jul 01, 2003 4:02 am

hari_trivedi wrote:
The back is sorta clumsy, and the lines don't flow like the solara

couldn't have said it better myself. the back IS sort of ugly, with and without the spoiler.

i couldn't agree more

by **cdssolara** » Tue Jul 01, 2003 7:38 am

I think it looks unfinished without the spoiler, but with the spoiler it looks pretty good. Also, the more recent versions (3.2) are much improved over the earlier versions, especially the 2.2.

by **SKYravefever** » Tue Jul 01, 2003 8:19 pm

CL-S hands down, but I'm not feeling the gold/champagne color. You'll need to factor in the $1-2K of a hit in selling your 2 MONTH (not year, 700t :wink:

) as part of the purchase. Add CompTech S/C, and you're ready to fly!

solara or Acura 3.2 cl Type "S"

Who is online