1st vs. 2nd Gen
 

I don't know how many of you have owned both 1st and 2 gen TSX, but for those that have I have a question for you. I have a 2006 with nav that I purchased new. I have enjoyed 103,000 trouble free miles, but I am considering something different. Do you think I will like the 2nd gen as much as my current car?

my dad had an 08 TSX, i had a 2010 TSX and just got a 2013 TSX. i prefer the 2nd gen except i wish it was still manual overdrive on the gear shift, not paddle shifters. test drive it and figure that out for yourself. much lighter steering wheel, diff feel to it

The second gen came with many improvements in the refinement category. Better sound isolation, firmer chassis, better interior quality. The second gen also has more room in the back seat as well. The electric power steering though is somewhat lacking. The only downfall IMO is the lack of a manual tranny after 2011 :(

The biggest and probably most important improvement was crash safety as the first gen tsx did not sore as well as the 2nd gen.

Are you just getting tired of your 1st gen??? at 103k miles you car has lots of life left and the money you save by keeping it could go into a IRA. Boring...I know, but saving money is always a good idea.

Maybe pick up an old school Honda or whatever old car you like and fix it up on the side for fun and keep the 1st gen as your daily. I picked up an IS300 5speed a while back and have been using that for autocross and road race events on the weekends.

Just some thoughts.

second gen is alot bigger than the 1st and nicer in my opinion but i would totally rock a 1st gen if i could have both at the same time.

It's a question of whether you prefer driving dynamics or comfort.

The 1G drivers better.
The 2G is bigger and more comfortable.

Apart from the 2G's numb electrically assisted steering -- which is actually pretty good as EPS goes -- I think it's a much better car than the 1G. It has superior chassis dynamics and a nicer interior IMO, and the extra size is useful. The 1G's steering is truly excellent though, and better than just about any EPS system on current cars.

I had a 2005 prior to my 2010. If it is anything I miss from the 1G is the amazing steering and it was more tossable during city driving. The Sports mode shifting in the gated shifter was more fun rather than the paddles, but I've got use to the paddles now. I like how the 2G feels better on the HWY.

I have both, and they are two very different cars (I have a thread on the first gen forum you might find worth a look at). I finally sold my 05 (at 178K miles and still as perfect as it could be at that age and mileage) and bought a very low mileage 010 (and still have the 07). One big thing I've noticed in the four months that I've had the newer car is that I really have little or no desire to mod it. I modded the 05 moderately, but the 010 just doesn't seem to instill that feeling. Though the engines appear almost identical on paper, they feel like completely different power plants. The older engine seems to beg to rev, and I regularly visited upper the rev range with the 05. Honda has changed it so much though, that revving much above 4K no longer seems necessary or even that rewarding. I agree that at 103K, as long as you've been religious with the maintenance, you should have many, many, trouble free miles ahead. If you enjoy the first gen car as much as I did and do, I would suggest that you think long and hard about replacing your 06 with a second gen car (or as I like to call them, the best Buick ever built in Japan...).

Depends on what you are looking for in the 2nd gen. I had an 06 and traded it for a 09. I am pleased with the upgrade and have been very happy with the 2nd gen. I would also look at a G37 as it seems to be in the same price range although not really in the same realm. The 1st gen felt faster and got slightly better gas mileage but was not as refined. I certainly enjoy the improvements in the 09 like the reverse camera and the tilting side view mirror. Whether you decide to keep the 1st gen or move to the 2nd gen, you made a good decision.

I've read the 1st gen TSX (K24A2) has 3 lobe cams for both intake and exhaust (variable valve lift part of vtec), where on the 2nd gen (K24Z3) only the intake cam is 3 lobe. This may make the 1st gen feel more rev happy...?

K24A2
http://www.acuraoemparts.com/delray/...4sea01_e11.png

K24Z3
http://www.acuraoemparts.com/delray/...tl2901_e11.png

and they get a proper exhaust manifold/header

There are still 6mt's available. Did you mean no 6mt tech's?

This may be, though the newer engine still likes to rev (and it can). The difference is I think that you no longer have to to get moving. Honda engines have always been (and still are) torque shy, and what little (relatively speaking) they do have, always peaks quite high in the rev range. It's necessary to "use" the engine in the older cars to make it really go, where as the low speed drive-ability is much improved in the 2nd gen cars. This is a good thing, and the car is a delight to drive "around town" (and no surprise, since Honda specifically targeted this area with the 2nd gen power plant). My comment was more directed at the fact (in my opinion) that the engine seems happy to just live below 4K rpms. This is good for mileage, but less fun. The increase in size and weight of the 2nd gen cars just exacerbates this I think. It just doesn't feel as "sporty" (whatever that means) as the 1st gen cars. I remind those here that these are just my observations coming from driving a 1st gen car for almost 6 years. Both are great cars, just in my opinion, less alike than the uninitiated might think.

? My 2012 is a manual.

For driving dynamics not being there on the 2nd gen -- ? It is a very entertaining car, very well balanced and great-handling out of the box. With a bit up suspension upgrades it's even nicer. It is a very capable chassis and I'm willing to bet it's stiffer than the 1st gen. Granted I haven't lived with a 1st gen car, but after 16K with my 2nd gen I would seriously question anyone saying the car lacks driving dynamics.

Stan

It's all relative. If you feel like the current generation car is good, the 1st generation car was even better balanced, turned in even more willingly, and offered superior feedback through its steering. Add to that less mass to carry around and a motor that felt more aggressive when revved into the VTEC range, it was dynamically a better car, but offered less in terms of gadgets, creature comforts, and sheer passenger volume.

^^ I can't completely agree, it isn't all relative. Weight distribution is what it is, 60/40, same on both (actually, mine is said to be 59/41). Weight difference is, what, 200lbs? (3,230lbs of 6MT '04 vs. 3,415lbs of 6MT '12 SE). That is not very much for a street car, some people ADD extra 200lbs worth of wheels/brakes on their cars. Chassis being stiffer is something that you can't fix easily, so that's a big selling point. Suspension is easy enough to change, so are tires/wheels. Same can be said about tuning. But, I'd have to take your word for it regardless since I haven't spent much time in the 1st gen car.

What I'm trying to say is, the 2nd gen has much potential, Honda didn't ruin the platform performance-wise like many seem to suggest.

IMO, the difference is similar to Miata's change from NA to NB -- they are somewhat different, I totally agree, but you'll have a hard time arguing the '99 not being better than a '90.

Stan

I've been modding the cu2 since I got it, with flashpro and the rv6 header, the motor loves to rev.

I am really pumped about the turbo that is being worked on, and that's the next major modification I am going to aim for.

The 1st vs. 2nd is the same argument 20 years later, with the cb chassis vs. the cd chassis. I preferred the cb, because it was so square, etc, vs. the cd which was much smoother/rounded off. Weight difference etc. But you know which one history smiles on more? CD. Even though the cb had a better shape, to me, and was smaller, the cd was larger, more comfortable, could get manual, better power delivery...

Nothing has changed.

i owned an 05 and now a 09 i prefer the 09 better looks (my .02) better chassis steering isnt as good as first gen but its good enough performance wise its not day and night the power is basically identical. i think more people just like the 1st gen because its a slimmer car and the steering and the aftermarket performance upgrades once our second gen gets our turbo setups completed the cu2 will be an animal

Love both cars. Have an 05 ssm and now 10 vbp. I think the 10 looks better, I do miss the manual shift instead of paddle shift other than that. I preffer the 10.

have you driven an IS250 for comparison? I would at drive one for a comparison. 6 speed auto in that car is smooth as butter, manual also available.