I am very seriously considering a purchase of a TSX (6sp,CG,non nav). I currently own a 2001 Accord EX auto (150 hp), and I am big fan of Honda/Acura (my current accord is the third EX I have owned since 1992). After a test drive with a TSX 6sp and much research (probably too much), my biggest concern is lack of torque (the big sticking point in most "expert" reviews). I thought the car accelerated nicely on the test drive, but I did not get too spend alot of time passing cars and "pushing it." I am not so much concerned with 0-60 time, my desire is to have good punch while already moving (the 45-65mph range). Comparing the torque to the current Accord 4cyl, it rates only 5 or 6 lbs-ft better! Does the TSX accelerate more than adequately at road speeds when you feel like making a statement (passing other cars, etc)?
Thanks for you replies...

 

I don't think you would be dissappointed, it's no Corvette but it certainly can scoot around traffic with no problem.

 

Well, the TSX still has 50hp and 14lb/ft at a slightly lower rpm over your Accord. I would say that the TSX doesn't have tons of torque but it has enough...and I think it's passing numbers are pretty good.

 

i pass cars easily in the 45-65 mph range usually in 5th gear...it doesnt make a statement(eg. this thing rips! is it turbo?) but it's adequate for normal driving

 

Quote:

I currently own a 2001 Accord EX auto (150 hp), and I am big fan of Honda/Acura (my current accord is the third EX I have owned since 1992).

Quote:

After a test drive with a TSX 6sp and much research (probably too much), my biggest concern is lack of torque (the big sticking point in most "expert" reviews).

Quote:

I thought the car accelerated nicely on the test drive

Quote:

but I did not get too spend alot of time passing cars and "pushing it."

Quote:

I am not so much concerned with 0-60 time, my desire is to have good punch while already moving (the 45-65mph range).

Quote:

Comparing the torque to the current Accord 4cyl, it rates only 5 or 6 lbs-ft better!

Quote:

Does the TSX accelerate more than adequately at road speeds when you feel like making a statement (passing other cars, etc)?

Quote:

Thanks for you replies...

 

We have a 5AT TSX and a 2000 Accord 4-cyl AT (same engine as the 2001, I believe). I hate going back to my Accord because the TSX is so much quicker, especially in 3rd gear and up. The only problem I have with the TSX in daily driving is that it is hard to stay under 80

The only people (IMO) who complain about the torque are those who are coming "down" to the TSX from V6s and I6s - plus professional automotive reviewers who still have that M3 fresh in their brain from last week. If you don't known any better (as I didn't), you will love it.

 

It gets up nicely in any gear which suprised me.

 

For having driven an Accord 98 LX auto and a 2003 LX-G auto, I can tell you it's no comparison with the TSX.

The stats may very well show only 5lbs-ft more than an 03 Accord, but it doesn't take into account the shorter gearing of the 6MT, as well as the broader torque curve of the TSX's engine compared to that of the Accord.

 

Lemme tell you something man, when you are driving 60 MPH and you kick it down to third gear, you could pass most cars on the road. Wow. What a rush!

 

Like any Honda 4-cyl engine, you have to keep the revs up in order to get the acceleration you want. The engine is so smooth, and the car is so quiet (for a 4), that you don't mind doing this. Just keep the revs above 3000 and you'll be fine.

My previous car was a 99 Accord EX 5-speed, i.e. the same engine as yours. There is no comparison between the two cars -- the TSX is MUCH faster. It accelerates so smoothly, you don't think you're moving as fast as you are.

 

finally. Downshifting is the shiznit. Buy the friggin car!

 

I have so much fun passing everyone in traffic. the only time that it has problem though is when i'm near standstill, 2nd gear won't cut it, and 1st gear is overkill

 

if you can live with an auto EX, you should have no problem with the TSX in 6spd form or even auto for that matter...just dont go and test drive the new V6 accords, altimas and camrys or even the M6's.

 

You're funny. The difference 0-60 between the TSX and the V6 powered cars you say not to drive (because they're just so incredible in your opinion?) is minimal - I doubt most people could feel/tell the difference without using a stopwatch. Really. And I drove most of the cars you mention here. You really are kidding by implying someone driving any of them wouldn't want a TSX afterward, right?

 

minimal!!!!???? lets see.... 0-60 in mid 6's (V6) vs mid 7's (TSX) for manual vs manual and if auto its low 7's vs high 8's (even the new toyota's with 225hp get 0-60 in 7secs flat with a SLUSHBOX)... anybody would be able to feel that difference, the difference is easily at least a few car lengths..but if you can look at the title of the post, he is concerned about TORQUE, anybody who's worried about torque after driving them would realize the TSX is nowhere near them. not saying which is better car to drive overall for you, but if he is concerned about torque, the tsx is not the car that will work......

 

CD got 7.1 or 7.2 out of the 6MT. So where is the big difference? And really stomping on the pedal in one of your faves brings out the nastiest rough sounds from under the hood of each of them. They don't feel anywhere near as stable as the TSX at speed, so the extra torque isn't so easy or fun to use. The 166 ft/lbs the TSX puts out feels like plenty, unless you're used to driving a 330i all the time - that is a different animal.

 

Gilbo is used to driving a 330, he owns one Damn that Gilbo, not sure why we just don't ban him

Anyway I have to agree with old Gilbo here. Driving a V6 Accord or Camry may be nowhere near a fulfilling as driving a TSX but they do have much more torque to play with (Accord 212. Camry 230) so the experience if tourque is what he's after may be better for him. I've drivin a V6 Accord and while its not fun to drive it moved around alot quicker than the TSX.

Apparently that new Toyota 3.3L is a gem. Can't wait to try one.

 

I think it kinda depends on which Accord V6; and with which transmission. Sure agree about the V6 coupe 6M, but that's a different sort of animal from the sedan, given the bigger, TSX sized brakes, larger wheels and tires and the strut tower brace that comes standard. The AT V6 Accord sedan is faster than the AT TSX in a straight line but surely not quicker through the twisties. I don't know how exactly much torque gets lost in the TSX torque converter but it sounds like it's a lot.

I do know I can chirp my tires in the higher gears with my 6M, this is kinda embarassing! Maybe Honda forgot to install the transmission-sparing ECU software in my car, too!

 

I've driven all the v6 cars mentioned except for the camry. The m6 will have the least difference in feeling , but you can still feel the extra torque. You can definately feel a difference in the v6 accord, and most definately without a shadow of a doubt feel the extra torque in the altima.

 

... as it rips the steering wheel out of your hands

As much as I like the M6, I was not impressed by the V6, though I admittedly drove the auto.

 

fdl, forgive me for beating this thing further but I think the torque issue is being overplayed. Icehouse has more alcohol than Amstel but I know which one I prefer drinking. The TSX is all about balance. Any more torque and something else might have had to be compromised (there might be excessive torque steer - V6 Altima has way too much of it - or we'd have got less refinement, as in the Accord V6). Mazda 6s, which actually has numbers closed to TSX, is the nearest competitor of the vehicles we're discussing in this thread, IMO. But it lacks a nice interior, a tad refinement and Honda build quality. Bottom line, we got a sweet running, refined little machine that's worth every penny. Let's enjoy it!

 

I drove both the stick and the auto 6...both were crap. I remember in the auto i bounced off the rev limiter when I had it in sportshift because it didnt shift fast enough. The breaks were too stiff and it really wasnt that fast. The clutch was a bit hard for my tastes...would really suck in traffic. The red made me want to murder people.

 

tsx-mdxman..i agree with you. I never said that those cars were better, just that you could feel the additional torque. TSX rules

 

The Accord V6 has 212 lb-ft of tourque and and from my experience and from reading reviews it has no noticeable tourque steer. As far as the TSX being compromised by adding more power, I think you've been listening to Larch too much

Thats just an insane way to look at things IMO. The TSX is underpowered, it needs more tourque and HP period, To think that it would be compromised in some way is just showing no respect for Honda enginerring. I'm certain Honda could figure out a way to add power to the TSX while keeping its suberb balance at the same time.

Are you listening Larch?

 

DCsteve, if TORQUE is really the issue, then your concern is legitimate. But if passing ability and pushing it in mid/high gears are the issues, then the TSX is more than adequate. I have the 6MT, and 3rd gear is awesome, with passing figures to prove it. I've grown to love revving this engine, coming from a "torquey" 4-cyl Camry. Since you're interested in the 6MT, I assume you enjoy revving it a little, in which case the TSX is perfect.

 

I know you're being lighthearted DOMN, but I think this statement is going a bit far. UnderTORQUED, maybe. But relative to others in its class (MB C-class, Audi A4 1.8, Saab, BMW 325, M6...) the TSX's acceleration (especially passing) is plenty competitive.

A 240HP, 200+TQ TSX with the same handling characteristics and gas mileage it has now -- that's asking too much I think.

 

Ha ha, Domn, I know you are trying to incite some verbal violence here. I didn't say the Accord V6 had torque steer, just that it's not as refined as the TSX engine. I did plenty of test drives and I own a bigger version of the V6 in my other car. Based on my own fairly extensive experience with both powerplants, this I4 is sweeter than its V6 sibling.
I don't think the TSX is underpowered. But I agree Honda can and will eventually coax more HP and torque out of the K24. That's all good. However, achieving or maintaining near perfect balance is not nearly as easy as you imply. Why do you think the car's not a torque monster right now? Also, keep in mind that if the TSX is perceived as too capable, it will eat up some of TL's market. That's a bigger balancing act Honda is probably already taking into account.

 

With a variable runner intake manifold given all else equal they could probably easily get 185lbft(up from the current 175ish @ 2700) and another 20 hp up top. If they were able to coax 400 more rpm out of it another 10 or so hp on top of that. That's my biggest dissapointment with the tsx engine, for all the grea tthigns about it there is a straightforward technology that could have been used to give it soem good gains. But i guess honda wanted to leave soemthing on the plate for future upgrades.

 

Am I listening to what?

As I see it, MDXMAN gets it. And I'm sure Honda/Acura get it too. Hey, y'all think they gave us "only" 200 hp because they want us to feel deprived and they want us to hunger for more? If you could just put in more so easily (and so well), they woulda done it. You can't change one major thing about a car without winding up changing others things too. Not necessarily make them worse, just change them. Which then might become a whole different story.

 

You guys are all nuts

There are cars out there with 730+ lb-ft (CL65AMG) and as soon as we start talking about Honda upping the tourque in the 166 lb-ft TSX, its like "Whoa, slow down there, we don't want whip lash now"

As I see it there two very good reasons why the TSX does'nt have more power today (Like Tinky said it can/should be easiliy accomplished). TSX-madman and LemasseHammer touched on them both.

1. Fuel mileage would be compromised
2. A more powerful TSX would eat into TL sales.

I really don't think it has anything to do with losing balance or compromising anything. The 220HP ITR is only an improvement on the 200HP RSX-S, so there should be no compromises in this situation either (Besides fuel consumption). Like I said, noone can guarantee that, but I have faith in Honda engineering. Apparently you guys don't

 

One more reason to add to you list is $$. I'm sure honda could get the k24 or similar engine to produce more power, while remaining small and light enough not to upset the handling balance of the car. Technically its of course possible, however it may cost alot more money and Acura wants to position this car, pricewise, in a certain range.

 

Right. Absolutely. (Except the whiplash part.)

It's because the whole thing about the TSX --- or maybe not the whole thing for everybody but the whole thing that makes it a great and remarkable car and which BTW is why the car is winning awards --- is what a remarkable balance it strikes between all considerations, and how well everything about the car works (or "harmonizes") with everything else about the car. It's almost a fukin Stradivarius. (OK everybody, google! ) THAT'S why we raise those points when you start talking about adding this or adding that to the TSX. We wouldn't raise these kinds of questions about most other cars, but we do raise them about the TSX, with good reason.

OK, an analogy. If you take a strict home run hitter, like Mark McGwire, and give him more power, that's all to the good, because he just hits home runs, and this way he'll hit more home runs. (Actually he's not the best example, because he was also a good fielder and anyway his home runs went so far that he didn't need extra power...... but you get the idea.) Or, for that matter, if you just give more power to most players, that's good too, because it'll outweigh whatever you might be taking away from them (like agility).

But if you take a guy like, say, A-Rod, and give him more power, I'm not so sure, because if you change his body how you'd be changing it by giving him more power, maybe he can't be a shortstop anymore, and then maybe you've decreased his value or his appeal. Anyway he's not A-Rod anymore.

So here's what it comes down to: Put more power or torque in the TSX, and maybe it can't play shortstop anymore. Or at least it won't play shortstop so nicely.

 

Yes, and further to your analogy, and further to my point above..I think maybe you can have make a-rod bigger, stronger and abetter power hitter, while keeping him as good or better at other positions, but at what cost? I think this is the key issue. The engineers at honda can no doubt pull it off...but it would price the TSX into a a place that they dont want it to be.

 

Ahhh, let me get this straight, your wondering about a lack of lbs/ft???
Ok then, lets look for some, well the viper is quick from 45-65. lots of torque! But you don't care about 0-60, so how about something electric, max twist is at 0 rpm, and great 45-65 times. How about a pushrod motor, much more torque there. Chevy makes great torque.
Listen bonehead, torque your butt and buy the tsx, stop whining about things you don't understand.
"I don't have enough torque". Check your bank account, you probably don't have the money either.!!!!!!!

 

Here is a guy ECsteve who is considering a TSX, makes the effort to test drive and research and pose a reasonable question to a forum and he gets a response like this. Kind of sad, if you ask me.

 

Kind of sad?, kind of sad is a sheep who can't think for himself! He drove the car, now ask he wants to know what others think?
I think I will ask your girlfriend what her previous lover thought!

 

Larch, not a very good analogy. In order to A-Rod or any other player for that matter to gain power he would have to add muscle meaning he would also be adding weight. (See Barry Bonds)

What I am proposing for the TSX does not include adding a 2.5, 2.6 or 3.0L engine which would add weight. It involves simply gaining more power out of the current 2.4L which will not add weight. The TSX would still retain its current weight but have power to push it around.

And I agree with fdl, doing this may drive up costs too much, although modifying the engine of the S2K has'nt seem to raise its MSRP significantly.

 

C/D got a 7.2..but that is best described as a onetime fluke..all other tests/mags have gotten mid to high 7's (MSN got a 8.5sec for a 6spd!!! but they didnt launch it hard, just normal and 9.5 with the auto..yikes!!!) so you cant use the 7.2 as the accepted avg... mid to high 7's is what you are looking at.. and you are just going too far saying the Accord V6, Alitma V6 are nasty sounding... nobody has ever complained about them being rough sounding, and the camry V6 is more smooth than the TSX (it was always smooth , now even more so)... you are making a big deal out of the torque steer issue... other than the maxima, the accord, camry, M6 and even the altima have had no complaints of torque steer... if this was the case the TL would steer itself into a wall and we should all drive echos .....

the TSX has more balance and probably more entertainning to drive (compared to accord, camry,altima), but the refinement of the engine and torque steer is a non issue, and there is no question that those cars are around 1sec faster 0-60 for manual and even more so for the auto b/c they have the torque so the slushbox won't adversely affect the car as much.

 

If you could really do that, then I agree with you.

(How's that for simple?)

(Edit) On second thought, I'm not sure it's that simple. You seem to assume that the weight would stay the same. Yes, 2.4L = 2.4L but does that mean the weight stays the same? I don't think it would.

 

Wrong, Gilbo. Altima has been charactorized in several reviews as having excessive torque steer. In fact, the consensus is, the 2.5 is a better bet for that car. The V6 Altima is really a good looking Maxima. Nowhere did I say the others had that problem. Engine refinement IS an issue across the board for them though. Push the others hard like you can (oops, you DON"T OWN/DRIVE the TSX) consistently with the TSX and you will definitely note a comparative lack of refinement in them. The TL powerplant has been taken to another level but at a cost - you're going to pay an extra $10K over an Accord to get it. Also, I wouldn't say CD's test results were a fluke, they're consistently the best and most accurate at testing cars.