Thanks to cp3117 for this info.

Click the third link in the first post to read the article.

Link to vwvortex

Notes
TSX: 0-60 7.2, 1/4 mile 15.7
Accord Ex V6 6MT 0-60 5.9, 1/4 mile 14.5

 

what a shame. The TSX has been dethroned...by the Accord and Jetta! What is this? It's a sad day. Well at least we got that last 10best award out of the TSX. Now we just have to wait until the next model comes out to get back on top.

 

They gotta spread the "love" around or they'll be accused of a Honda bias. VW and Audi win a number of these things because they only keep the car for a while. Longevity or reliability is not a concern in these tests. I've been doing cars long enough to know that you can't "live and die" on reviews, because you never win them all!

 

inbeforedipkatsayssomethingabout thejettaagain

 

Good point. I do like audis. Colin you spoke of the reliability of the TSX. My family has always been Honda people ever since the first cvcc back in '73? However the last 3 honda's that we bought('05 Odyssey, '05 TL, and '04 TSX) have had issues. TL tranny issues, broken seat in ody, broken console in TSX, mismatched panel inside ody, condensation in TSX headlights, cracked fogs on ody. This is all in the last year. It seems like I always have my TSX getting something fixed. As an Acura dealer guy do you think that Honda may be slipping a little? Does reliability continue to be a Honda attribute?

 

I don't think so. Consumers are MUCH more picky these days. Boards like this allow people to pool knowledge and sometimes something small gets blow out of proportion. Also, expectations for reliability are becoming harder and harder to meet. Do you really think Hyundai is more reliable than our cars? Of course not, it's just that the expectations for them are so LOW, its easy to pass them. If we're having these issues as the cars get more complicated, jsut think how the Germans are faring!

Early TSXs had some sealing issues on the headlights, but we really haven't seen too much lately, you can't blame the car for a cracked fog light. As for the other things, I suppose I'd have to withhold judgement until you know if its a widespread problem. I am aware of no issues with new TL trannys.

 

My dad has trouble with going into 3rd gear on his MT TL. I drove it the other day and it doesn't quite go all the way into gear. you have to double check to make sure which is kinda annoying. Acura offered to replace his entire tranny under warrenty though.

 

Jetta TSX
This is getting funnier.

 

This is a very SAD news!!!

Acura, when are you gonna give us the turbo inline four?

 

The Jetta owners at Vortex are gloating big time.

 

Is C&D drunk or something??? They are comparing a premium brand (Acura TSX) car to an American brand POS (Pontiac G6). I feel ripped off!!!

I can understand the Mazdaspeed 6 because thats a sporty and beautiful attempt for Mazda to make it in the big leagues but I feel like the TSX was degraded from its original competitors (Saab 9-3, A4, Subaru Legacy, even a 325i). I don't even consider this test to be worthwhile as those cars don't compete with the TSX. Apples to organges if you ask me.

Pishhh.. Pontiac G6... HAHAHA

 

on looks alone i'd chose the tsx. looking at the point breakdown and results, i'm thinking . looks like they messed around with some numbers to justify their choice. nice try, c&d.

 

The Jetta seems like a really nice little car, especially for the price, but after my problems with an Audi, I would take the TSX over the Jetta every day of the week

 

Hmm... why wasn't the Altima SE-R included?

 

Not having read the article, I can understand why C&D would pick an Accord EX V6 over a TSX for a "car that can do everything". Its bigger, more omph from the V6 and cheaper than a TSX. The TSX attributes are more obvious to those of us who prefer a more sporting ride, more luxury, and don't want to see our car on every school yard parking lot. So I can understand the Accord coming out on top of the TSX.
But the Jetta- I have not seen an overly positive review of that thing yet-especially considering the $$$ that it costs. As for reliability, perhaps C&D considers a "car that can do everything" includes multiple trips to the dealer or can break down on its own

 

I'm glad this article praises the Accord. Lots of times the TSX forum portrays the Accord as some old boat.. when in fact the Accord is a superb car.

 

Funny that the 2006 isn't any quicker (or slower) than an 04/05.

And I agree that the Altima SE-R would have been a good choice for this comparo.

 

Where is the r version of the tsx? Sure it wouldn't fit in the under 30k but it would smoke that line up.<---can't I dream?

 

Yup. My friend with a Jetta coming over and leaving a puddle of oil in my driveway every visit is wearing a little thin. Last night he needed a jump start to get going, I haven't needed a jump start in 35 years of driving Honda/Acura cars.

 

What I don't get about this comparo is where C&D lists under the "Highs" for the TSX that it has a "sweet engine, snick-snick six-speed," etc, etc.

Then in the main text of the article they complain about the "relatively modest power" and how this means the TSX needs to "spend more time at the gym."

How can both of these be true? Either the engine is sweet or it isn't. Seems to me these are contradictory statements.

Slap the Hondata reflash in the TSX and many of the issues C&D gripes about are resolved.

 

I mean I guess honda wants to save stuff for tuners, but why would they not back up the VTEC point to 5000 where it is so much more effective. It makes the hp curve so much smoother. That would be so simple and it can't be that they don't know about it. It doesn't seem like there are any negative effects, except to help out an already underpowered car.

 

^^^I disagree. To say a car with 200 HP is "underpowered" is just mistaken, IMO. A Kia Spectra is underpowered. Could it use more horsepower? Sure, so could a lot of cars, mostly because having more HP is almost always a good thing. But the TSX has plenty of poop. And it's beautifully balanced.

 

Feliz my first Honda was a 1976 Honda Civic CVCC. What was yours?





Excited

 

The way I see it, the TSX isn't underpowered. But would be just about perfect with 230hp.

The K24 is just such a smooth balanced engine, it could have 5 horsepower and it would still be a "underpowered" but "sweet" engine.

 

Bah, that really is a bunch of crap. Proven reliability should be a factor in deciding these "awards". Sure there are a few problems here and there with the TSX, but ok, a little condensation in the headlights, some lights going out in the console, seat moves a little, etc... come one... small annoyances... the car still runs, and runs well.

VW products... sure they look good (well they used to anyway... if the rest of the line follows the way of the Jetta, they are in trouble) but they are a bomb waiting to go off. All the VW/Audi products we have owned in my whole extended family along the way all had major, electrical and mechanical issues that cost rediculous amounts of $ to correct. An exhaust on my old Passat was like $700!! Come on... My mother in law's new passat had to go back to the dealer 3 times in the 1st month for issues with the interior lighting and the radio... 1st month... unnaceptable for a car that costs over 30 grand...

I can not say the same for the Honda products in my family since they have been wonderful. In fact, most of my family still drives Hondas... because they have lasted... so that's why we keep buying more. I will always have a Honda/Acura in the driveway because I can rely on them. Plus I have a childhood friend that grew up to be an Acura mechanic and he has always hooked me up with service and parts when needed. He steered me towards the TSX when I was ready to trade my Accord. He said in his opinion, the TSX is the best car they make right now. He rarely sees them for any major problems since they have been out in 04.

TSX > any VW product IMO (even though I do appreciate the GTI,R32)

 

Hi Excited, our first Civic was my wife's and believe it or not we can't remember the year, we think a 1970 or 71, I'll dig some pictures out. The first years in Canada were 68 or 69 weren't they? She had four Civics and then a real nice 1990 Accord coupe MT that I regret selling to this day. The TSX is my fourth Acura, I still have an MDX. My first car was a 32 Ford and I/we've owned about 50 cars since then but that includes a company car every 2-3 years which were just like my own. And you?

 

The Jetta's styling will age quickly and is unreliable - but I guess they can't really give points for these beyond subjective points to the guys who lease cars for 1 or 2 years. Yea, the comparison is weird, Accord V6 (a great car, but an unsporty handling car) with the Mazdaspeed (the opposite handling of the Accord). The Jetta's interior is amongst the most bruttle lookling in the industry (with the exception of the moonroof circular control which is great). But what are you going to do. Although C&D likes the TSX...I don't put much stock in these kinds of opinions because I always remember when the Dodge/Plymouth Neon came out the magazines said it was the car of the year!

 

I venture to say that the TSX is underpowered because of the cars that surround it. Going by C&D 0-60 numbers, there are lots of cars that run in the 7 second range with the TSX running at 7.2. For a car to be sporty I think that it needs to be able to beat the majority of cars from a redlight. When I have to worry about running against my mom's '05 Odyssey and other SUVs it makes me feel that the TSX is underpowered. If the TSX ran 0-60 in the mid 6's I think that it would be faster than the average car, but slower than a sports car. I think that is where a sports sedan should fall.

 

*applause* amen!

 

^^Again, I disagree. I couldn't care less what the cars around me can do, or how fast I can go from stoplight to stoplight. All I know is when I'm in the TSX I can hustle the hell out of it through all manner of turns and twists and feel rock solid doing it. I sure don't think about 0-60 times then.

Power is rarely an issue. It's more of a desire, something I'd take if it was offered. The TSX does what it was designed to do very well, and that's rip through tight sections of road with style.

 

Again, I disagree. I couldn't care less what the cars around me can do, or how fast I can go from stoplight to stoplight. All I know is when I'm in the TSX I can hustle the hell out of it through all manner of turns and twists and feel rock solid doing it. I sure don't think about 0-60 times then.

Power is rarely an issue. It's more of a desire, something I'd take more of if it was offered. The TSX does what it was designed to do very well, and that's rip through tight sections of road with style.

 

How much power does C/D want from a NA 4 cylinder? Of course honda could give it s2000 power or add a v6 as an option(that would be f'in sweet) but how much would it sell on a world scale? Which is really the reason they make cl7/9. They have the Av6 and TL already. Not as good looking but to each's own.

If you look at the numbers the TSX only scored less in the power categories and handling. Better stock tires will cure handling.

 

I wish I could experience the handling of the TSX more often. I think that to really get a good feel for what your car can handle you have to take turns closer to the limit...which is prohibited by the speed limit. Where I live the cops are insane. I feel like I can get away with a little rush from the redlight, but I have trouble driving fast through the twisties cause I never know when I will find a cop. It also seems more dangerous to drive fast than to accelerate from a redlight. Consequently I put more stock in acceleration because it is more usuable on a daily basis. I agree that the TSX has superb handling though. I drive my dad's TL and its handling always leaves me wishing for my TSX even though I know the TSX isn't nearly as fast.

 

Sure looks like the GLI has the potential to be better overall than the TSX. But what VW must prove is that it can make reliable cars. I look at CR reliability reports and VW, while having improved somewhat, is still crap compared to most other makers (esp. Honda's and Toyota). A car could be the best thing since sliced bread and I wouldn't even give it a moment's thought if it doesn't have a red circle in the reliability rating; I'd rather drive a slug that won't break down than a race car that's always sucking up my time driving it to and from the shop.

To each their own. I think it's too early for the Jetta drivers to be gloating - give it 3 to 5 years and see if VW has actually changed anything but the package (same crap, new package). I hope they have, as I'd then consider an Audi as my next car in 7 - 10 years.

 

I don't doubt that the driving experience of the GLi is great, and based upon a few days of testing, I could see how it would fare well. The Accord, though, I don't know. A buddy of mine has one, auto though, but the driving experience is lacking. It has a front-heavy, and overall heavy feel. And the torque steer even with the auto gets in the way of the handling, much like the TL.

Actually, this overall lineup of cars is kind of silly. To me, this test reinforces what a tremendous value the TSX is. Why? Because, from an equipment standpoint, quality and refinement standpoint, and ownership standpoint (level of service from dealer, loaner car etc) the TSX really competes with entry level luxury sport sedans, like the IS250, A4, 325i, 9-3. None of those are in this test because similary equipped they're 35k.

The cars in this test are basic family sedans from basic manufacturers, sold on volume lots, and these models have just been given the "sport" treatment. So, sure, in certain aspects they can better the TSX's numbers, but overall they're all still the next step down the line to me...........

 

It interesting to read about the new horsepower wars, a la late '60s. Car makers are slapping higher and higher horsepower engines, turbochargers, superchargers, etc. into their daily-driver sedans and successfully generating buzz about the latest super-high horsepower car.

I've said it before: for me, if I were going to spend $28k on a car that I really need to go fast and look great, I'd build a Rat-motored '68 Camaro and spend $10k on the paint job. I guarantee it wouldn't take me 12 seconds to do anything.

I would chew my arm off before I'd spend $28k on an abomination like the VW, which will be worth 35% of new in four years. But that's me -- there are people who would say the TSX is too tame for them and must have horsepower bragging rights, even though they're not sure which end of the car the horsepower gets made. (Not implying that's anyone on AZ.) That difference in outlook is what makes a market for more than one car.

 

I agree with you. I agonized for several months between the purchase of a TSX and a six-speed Accord coupe before deciding on the Accord. I'm sure if I had to choose again it wouldn't be an easier, but I've found my Accord can easily hold its own against many other superb automobiles.

Terry

 

I'm not sure what Accords the posters on this forum are driving, but my 05 Accord V6 coupe doesn't feel nose heavy and doesn't exhibit much torque steer. There is a reason the TSX does not have torque steer, after all - it takes torque to have it.

While I'm not pleased with the GLI finishing first, I agree with them placing the Accord in front of the TSX. I've driven both extensively and the Accord, given more aggressive rubber, is just as competent.. and the J30A4 V6 is awesome.

 

The TSX (and the Accord for that matter) are a getting a bit long in the tooth. This was bound to happen. However, since I bought my car the long haul, it flat out doesn't matter that a newly upmarketed Jetta can beat it.

The TSX is too good of an argument for great automobile design in terms of the total package. So good that in my mind it is good in my garage for 10 years. As a honda/acura it will be consistently smooth, reliable, high-revving, and solid just like my Integra and Civic. The Jetta, and other VWs have just too many issues to deal that my family and friends are all too familar with. A friends 1.8t engine had turbo and electronics problems, a friends Corrado VR6 had problems with the electrics and the shifter, my uncles Rabbit and Scirraco had a ton of problems. it took getting stuck in the middle of the Arizona desert with my uncles Vanagon before he learned his lesson and went Honda.

The funny thing is that when the TSX (and accord for that matter) get redesigned a year or 2 from now, the Jetta won't even be on our radar. I don't even think Honda or this board would gloat over anything like that and the comparisons won't be against it. Rather I think the HoMoCo is more concerned with benchmarking the 3 series handling while keeping up with the hp war with Infiniti/Nissan with the next FMC rather than think back to a C & D or Edmunds comparo. So the Jetta, while good for the time being, is merely a blip on the radar.

Happy Holidays all!

 

The Jetta is merely a blip on the radar screen and when the TSX does get a major overhaul along with the Accord, the Jetta will not be able to compete.

I agree with most of what you said. However, to say that ths TSX is a basic family sedan from a basic manufacturer sold on a volume lot is not exactly correct. Most family people buy Camry's or Accord's, not a TSX. Secondly, Acura is not just a basic manufacturer. Honda and Toyota are basic manufactrers but Acura is not... its a premium brand. Thirdly, most of the people on this board will tell you that they had to wait for their TSX and that there are not volumes of TSX's sitting on Acura dealership lots. The TSX is in large part responsible for wht Acura's numbers have been raising over the past few years because it is in high demand. These cars are not just sitting on lots like some of the others in this test.