I more prefer a 9000 rpm redline S2000 engine on TSX but still keep the usable torque like what we have right now!

 

You are safe to keep your '04. No way they are adding all that to the 2nd gen TSX!!!! No freaking way, that's just so not Honda!

 

I am easier to please then, I just want Hondata on my '05

 

I'm thinking like you. What I want is for Honda to is bump the redline up on the K24 to 8,000-ish. That and memory setting for the driver's seat is what I want to see on the '06 model!

Now before anyone starts to claim that the piston speed in the K24 is already faster than in the F20C (S2000), let me correct you now because that's just wrong. Yes I've seen that claim made several times, but when I do the math that statement doesn't jive.

 

you people are WAAAY too into the power thing...

like others said, i just like 10-20hp, BT, driver/pas memory seats, or mp3 navi player for '06.

 

Honda makes its own transmissions, as opposed to buying them from a supplier?

 

I don't know but if I don't think that means that turbos are unreliable. Toyota has had many turbos in their lineup over the years. Maybe they are just focusing their strenghts in other avenues right now (i.e. hybrids). And don't tell me that a hybrid is more reliable than a turbo setup.

 

I wish they'd buy their AT's from GM, but they make everything in-house.

 

I didn't!

 

It's not just the piston speeds. It's also the fact that big CC cylinders like the 2.4 have a much harder time filling up properly over 7500rpm, like Hondata has stated, than smaller displacement 4 bangers.

So if no power up in the revs (easily I should say), there's really no point for Honda in trying to overdo it.

 

oh oh.... i know, how about an i5 k30 =P that would be sweeet... =) kinda a redo of the vigors 2.5 i5.... i would trade up.. i think...

 

I agree getting the revs up in the larger displacement 4-banger would harder, but I'm also not asking for 9k rpm either. And I only mentioned this piston speed stuff because I'm tired of reading that falsehood that people keep rehashing. In all honesty, I'd be happy with a 7500rpm redline (not fuel cut-off) -- as long as I get that memory setting on the driver's seat too in MY06.

 

Well it isn't exactly false either.

Check this out: Post 11 and 13: https://acurazine.com/forums/showthr...ghlight=piston

You can't argue the TSX isn't already a high-strung engine, especially with Hondata. They do have their limits to be able to operate reliably.

 

Doesn't look like there is room for another cylinder under the hood. I5s are just silly; I don't know why VW chose one for the new Jetta.

If I was a betting man, I'd put money saying the '06 TSX would have the following new features;
1. One-touch sunroof controls and/or memory driver's seat
2. 10 more HP so the cheaper RSX wouldn't outpower it.
3. Slightly different wheels (maybe just the finish or spoke count)
4. Maybe a new color combination

...and thats it. After all, when has Honda/Acura ever done anything drastic/exciting for a mid-cycle refresh? Its always 10 HP and/or 0.2 liters here, new electronic gizmo there, done.

 

If 4940ft/min is less than 4965ft/min then yes the statments I've ready are falsehoods. Trying to say a stock TSX engine (or even one with the Hondata upgrade) has a faster piston speed than a stock F20C is just plain wrong. BTW, the pistons in a stock TSX engine barely top 4600ft/min.

 

Note that at no time have I ever claimed the TSX doesn't have a high revving engine. I am only trying to correct a falsehood that many people (around here and elsewhere) seem report as a truth.

 

I agree will all your points (and they almost mirror what I've said before), except that I think they bump the HP a little more. I think we'll see a 15HP increase to get it higher than the RSX and to further distance it from the I4 Accord (which is suppose to get a 10HP bump).

 

Isn't the RSX going byebye?

 

I'm not buying the whole turbo-reliability thingy. Lot's of manufacturer's are selling turbocharged vehicles and warrantying them for 50-60K miles. Heck, my 2001 1.8T has a 100K mile powertrain warranty. You're right and I expect an IMA-type setup is far more complicated with many more possible points of failure.

I bet the real reason is emissions. Honda is very proud of its ULEV vehicles and turbo motors are hard to get below LEV standards.

The pro - normally aspirated crowd is missing the point, IMHO. A properly engineered turbo I4 has a boat-load of low-end torque (207 lb-ft in the upcoming 200hp 2.0T vs. 166 lb-ft in the TSX) and feels more like a V6 in normal driving, all while offering the fuel economy and weight advantages of the smaller motor.

 

Eventually, but I expect it still be around as an 2006 model. Even if it is gone later this year then just insert it's replacement (the 200HP Civic SI that's coming) in my statement above.

 

Emissions is the most likely reason.

I don't know why people are so against turbos, they give excellent performance, fuel economy and don't carry a weight penalty like a V6 would.
Also with the number of performance-minded members on this site, I would think people would be all over a turbo TSX for the upgrade potential. I/H/E/Reflash on a 1.8T yeilds 35% more horsepower and 50% more torque. All this without adding any weight.

 

The only negative I can think of, lag.

 

Properly executed, lag is practically unnoticeable. I had no idea my dad's XC70 was turbocharged until I looked under the hood. It felt like a torquey V6 but it's an I5 with a light pressure turbo.

 

Huh?

 

GM makes some of the best automatic transmissions in the world. Seriously.

BMW bought from them for many years, they still might.

 

Too bad that a 2.5L I5 wouldn't fit longitudinally under the hood. The car could use the extra torque. The Vigor and the 2.5 TL both have a non-VTEC 2.5L I5 that puts out 176hp and 170lb-ft of torque. It seems pretty zippy already (I've test driven the TSX and it was still faster by a chunk). I think if they built the 2.5L I5 with i-VTEC, it would make a great engine.

 

Go to bmw forums, you will able to see how many complaints on their auto tranny! well... but even their manual tranny is not any better!

 

I used to have the S70T5M and the lag is crazy! it made me never want to own a turbo. I really the response of that POS.

 

Have you been to the TL forums?

Edit: It appears GM stopped supplying trannies to BMW in '98.

 

No, auto tranny of pre-facelifted E46 were from GM.

 

As opposed to XC70, the T5s were high pressure turbos at 15lbs of boost. Obviously, they were not discreet by the least. But turbo technology wasn't then what it is now.

 

2.5L I5 is a Great Engine!!!! I had 2 Vigors and a 2.5 TL. I have a TSX now. It is best Acura I have owned. You want be disappointed with a TSX.

But, just think what Acura's engineers could get out of that engine today. That was an early 90's design.

 

LOL...how did the discussion for the TOV news for a turbo tsx ended up in here? The tread title is deceiving

 

Because when the 2006 talk started, some people started talking about the turbo-TSX that was supposely coming.

 

It is coming, a little birdie told me so.

 

Just like the SSM (later known as the SSX then as the S2000) was going to come with a V5?

 

Wait, I never said that it it can't be true

In reality it looks like the 06, 07 TSX will soilder on much the same with maybe the addition of 10-20HP and a few knick knacks here in there. We'll probly have to wait til 08 for a all new 250+ HP version unfortunately.

 

This a good example to illustrate the comparative benefits a turbo setup would offer:

The current VW 1.8T (medium-pressure as far as turbos go, 11-12 psi) puts out 180 hp and 174 lb-ft @ 1950-5000 RPM.

It's smaller, quieter, lighter, more powerful , has a much flatter torque curve, and gets better fuel economy to boot.

 

...Based on my experience with the 1.8T (I just traded my '03 Passat), I wouldn't say it's quiter at all. It did pull a little stronger, but the turbo lag was significant. I was averaging 26-28 MPG on my AT Passat, but am averaging 28-30 on my AT TSX. Then there's the reliability factor (but that's off topic)...

 

So ... even though I am a TL owner now ... I can still drop some scoopage.

Reliable source says .... TSX will get turbo most likely first for Acura ... and it is VERY VERY likely that the only reason the TSX might get it 2nd is that the RSX will attempt to be saved by dropping a turbo in it.

He also confirmed he knew what TOV released which was that the V6 for the RDX decision was made quite some time ago ... but it was only because the drivetrain was not a match for THAT particular car. Stay tuned folks

And yes .... the sources name is ... "T_e O___e"

P.S. I'll still take all you boyz and your turbo TSX's with my 6MT TL