mrdeeno

If the M's nav system is any indication of what the next g35's system is going to be like, it'll be as good as any system Acura has to offer (next gen. G35's will have Nav-traffic). It may not be as quick-to-learn as Acura's (Infiniti's isn't hard to use, just slightly less "intuitive", but functionally on par).

EuRTSX

Subaru Legacy.

russ_777

We own an 06 TL 5AT, 03 G35 Coupe 6MT and 01 CL Type S. Have driven TSX & 325.

Ditto the other comment about just modding a TL to get the ride/handling you want...it's not that expensive to do. You will be much more comfortable in the TL long term.

One thing I woud suggest is that if you really are going to hold the car for 8-10 years, then for gosh sakes buy a new model. The TSX is in its 3rd year and will be coming out with a new model in 08 (late 07). The TL is also in its 3rd year, but is scheduled to be revised the year after the TSX is. That's why I think the new G35 sedan is your best bet. It's navi will be based on that in the M, and that's a damn good navi (unlike the one in the current G). Also, the pictures of the new interior look far supeior to the current G35 interior....Infiniti listened to their customers and it appears that they have addressed that issue. My main issue with the upcoming new G35 sedan is I woudln't buy it unless they get significantly better gas mileage than the current ones do. When your competition gets 31 hwy (BMW 3) and 29 hwy (TL) you just can't afford to roll something out there that's getting 25 hwy. Fer cryin out loud a frikkin C6 Vette with 400 hp gets 28 mpg hwy!!!

psteng19

If the next-gen G35 nav is derived from the current Infiniti M, it may rival Acura's NAV in terms of quality and ease-of-use.
The M nav has gotten tons of praise.

I too would wait for the new G35 this fall.
It supposed to have a refined interior, better chassis and revised VQ.

FRANTSX

Since you have a family, I don't think you should be worried about how the TL handles. You aren't going to be taking curves and cornering much with your family in the car as well as when you are on business trips. For the family, I think you should get the TL. For yourself, I think you should get the TSX. If you can drive Manual, get the 6 speed or at least test drive it and you'll see a difference in power. Definitely stick with Acura especially if you have the college years coming up. How much will the kids be in the car anyways? The TSX back seat is fine for regular sized 16 year olds but if I had a family and wanted a perfect car for 4, I would get the TL. Hey, the kids will be gone to college in a few years anyways, so just get the TSX for YOU!. haha

Beoshingus

No. His wife's my sister. She can not drive stick.

Shr1ke - I'm tellin' ya man, try out a TL with A-Spec. See what that does to the handling. Try posting to the TL forum and ask for A-Spec owners' impressions of the difference between stock TL handling and A-Spec handling. Call around and see if any of the dealers have an A-Spec TL to test drive (not likely, but possible.) I think you could add the suspension by itself and have it installed for somewhere in the neighborhood of $1,000 (somebody tell me if I'm way off there.) Might make all the difference in the world when comparing it to the handling of the ol' Town Car.

ninjamyst

Have to disagree on this. I think buying a new model during its first year release is a very very bad and common mistake. First, you are paying a higher price tag because the car is "hot". Second, you will be the guinea pig for first year model problems. Finally, your "new" model car will quickly be refreshed in 2-3 years with minor but often desired changes/improvements. So the TSX is probably the best bet right now because it was just recently refreshed. Or wait for the '07 refreshed TL. If you plan to NOT hold the car for 8-10 years, then buy the first year model.

apnorm

iTrader: (3)

I haven't driven the G35 or TSX so I can't comment on those. My wife had a BMW 325 and while we both loved driving that car, she had enough problems for me not to buy another BMW in the future. The only way I see myself owning a BMW is if I have too much money and it's one of my "toy" cars - which won't happen unless I win the lottery.

As for the TL, it's amazing what a rear sway bar, air intake system and larger tires will do for it's performance! I've heard the aspec suspension is great even with stock tires too!

limited

I have to agree with you on that. Never buy a first year car! The best options right now is either the TSX of G35 both of them have had their refresh and the 06 G35 is the final production year for this body.

I choose the G35 sedan because I was looking for a performace oriented sedan and the G35 edge out the TL in every peformace aspect. To be honest safety wasn't even a concern to me. The TL does have a much nicer interior, however on the road very much like my moms v6 accord.

rugbybrado

bold statement, my 2005 2.5 altima is faster( over a car lenght) than the tsx is, and this is with me driving the tsx and my friend driving my altima - last week to be exact. very surpring actually, the altima has 20k on it with mobile one oil, and the tsx had 3k on it - besides it not being broken in yet (since cars do get faster, but not that much faster) i dont know what the deal was. They are both autos as well.

Nissan makes a very strong 2.5 4 cyl. and i average 30mpg on the highway, but i have heard alot of stories of the 3.5 getting poor gas mileage.

2.5-liter DOHC 16-valve 4-cylinder engine S
175 hp1 @ 6,000 rpm
180 lb-ft1 @ 4,000 rpm

TSX
205 @ 7000 rpm
164 lbs-ft @ 4500 rpm

In all honda motors people have always complained about tourqe, i dont see why they dont finally get off there asses and quit chasing five hp gains and give the motors some balls, one thing ive noticed hp used to sell cars, but now tourqe does.

bradykp

BMW forum:

"I traded in my 96 tl for 3k a few years ago. While the BMW will probably cost you 3-4 k more over the life of the car in repairs, you'll still be able to sell an old one for at least that much more when you are finished with it.
If you are the kind of person that will cringe at the first $600 repair bill even though the car is 5 years old and has 90k on it, don't get a bmw---or ANY german car for that matter. If you can live with having some repairs and maintenance done, you'll rarely find a better driving experience. Despite your sister's problems, these cars are very reliable through the drivetrain. Good luck with your search"

While this guy has some good points, i think it's funny he justifies 3-4k in repairs by a higher resale value (which really isn't that much better than acura). Also, $600 in repairs for a BMW will cover a new gas cap, i don't know what he's fixed for only $600. My dad loves his 1989 528i, but the thing is a money pit, no doubt about that.

fun to drive though

bradykp

i drove a friends nissan altima 2.5 in florida. when i stepped on the gas to accelerate into the passing lane, the car made a shitload of noise, and has almost NO response whatsoever. I'm not saying the TSX isa beast, but it responds when i put my foot on the gas. the altima didn't.

those numbers you posted show pretty equal cars, except for the 30 extra horses in the TSX.

Shr1ke

I'm getting more and more folks telling me that BMW's seem to take a lot of upkeep and tend to have a lot of problems. My sisters BMW is one of them. What types of problems do you see on these cars? Will not the warranty cover these issues? Or do these problems just keep coming one after the other? I mean, I can see having a problem here and there. What about price? I heard $2000 repair bills are common. Is that correct?

bradykp

I don't know directly about newer Bimmers, but i know my dad has had things fixed on his 1989 528i, and the bills are usually hovering at $1,000 at a minimum. No one works on the cars for one thing, so you're almost forced to go to the dealer.

Here's a story, and my friend usually doesn't BS so it's probably true.

My buddies girlfriend has a 3 series. He was driving it one day, and he said he could tell the battery was on it's way out. So while he was visiting her and her parents, he said he'd go to the auto parts store and pick up a batter and install it. well, he spent 30 minutes trying to find the battery, only to be told that BMW has a proprietary battery, and only "authorized" mechanics could install it. Well, by "authorized" they mean the dealer. So he goes to the dealer.....Battery cost $600 installed. Or it might have been $700. either way, it was some obscene price.

Now a lot of things will be covered under warranty. But you specifically said you were getting a car for 8-10 years.

If you were getting a car and only keeping it for the warranty period, and the price difference wasn't a big deal to you, I'd say get the bmw hands down over the TSX. I love the TSX, but BMW is a great machine when you have the warranty behind it.

BMW - you WILL spend a lot of money once the warranty is up. Not only because their parts are expensive, but because no one works on them, so Labor is outrageous as well.

the only private mechanic in my area (northeast PA) that works on BMW's charges $70/hr in labor, and works very slowly.

Shr1ke

I mentioned this to our BMW Dealer. He said that at the end of the Warranty period, I could renew the Warranty for another 3 years for $2700. I need to check in on this more. But if you could renew the Warranty for $2700, then your saying that this would be a great car to buy?

rugbybrado

im sure on the highway the tsx made use of its 30 extra horses(since hp = top end, while tourqe = low end). Like i said before if anything i was surprised the altima was faster from the stop light to 40 - 50mph(we were in town).

rugbybrado

-For my age ive had a number of cars, one of them ive posted about was a 2003 saab 9-3, great looking car, fun to drive, and turbo power - but the thing LIVED at the car dealer. You couldnt find anyone else in oklahoma to work on it and the dealer wasnt so fond of me after 3 months of having it in there every other week, at first for trivial european car stuff(computer glitches, electronic gremlins, small things stopped working) and for each little part that they would have to order it would take atleast two weeks to arrive. I could just not get over how many TRIVAL things went wrong with that car because at the time it was TWO years old. Well long story short for a two month period after that it spent 5 weeks in the shopt i decided i had enough of euro cars and that it just wasnt worth it.

-On the same note i would routinely get bumped for some of my bigger problems so the mechanics could work on someone elses easier fixes first.


I dont care how "great" or "exciting" some euro car is to drive, if reliabilty is sh*t it wont matter anyway.

rugbybrado

*edit* I still visit the saab messageboard often and its funny how those guys still talk about how awesome there cars are when the are having such trival stuff like displays not working- then working later, cd players not working - then workign later, car not wanting to unlock, alarm going off while driving, car not starting - then starting later, ......you get the idea, and this stuff happens routinely and they consider it basically normal and just the "electronci gremlins acting up" ...NO, in this day and age a cd player should not only sometimes work in a car thats a year or two old. All this stuff is technology that has been out for over 20 years, and the euro brands still cant get some of it right! Why would you want to drive a car like that.

bradykp

i'm sure it doesn't cover everything, read every detail of that warranty. and talk to current BMW owners. it's the only way you can fully understand.

bradykp

try driving the tsx in SS mode and keep it in lower gear longer. i get much much more response out of the tsx as compared to the 2.5 altima.

bradykp

Saabs are tough to own too, even though they are nice cars. expensive to maintain, and hard to find people to work on them. same as Bimmer.

bradykp

it's mostly because the euro brands are adventerous enough to keep trying new technologies. it's not that they haven't mastered the old stuff, it's that they are constantly evolving. honda plays it safe, and waits for technology to be mastered usually before it starts using it.

mrdeeno

Not true...last time I looked, the Japanese makes were the first to install in-dash CD changers and DVD-based navigation systems.

Not only that, there are numerous electronics that are more problem prone relative to Japanese makes (lighting and ignition control to mention a few). But then again, most euro makes use Bosch, so that's probably why.

nasalcedo03

Actually Lexus has the most technologically advanced stuff in their cars

CarbonGray Earl

I wonder if their jets have the same problems with electronics, avionics, etc. Kinda scary to think these guys make the jets that defend their homeland....

jwhite4

If you are looking to keep it for 8-10 years, then you really want decent long-term reliability. I think the first tier manufacturers for this will be Honda (+ Acura) and Toyota (+ Lexus). You might elimininate BMW (and perhaps Nisson/Infiniti) just because of this.

Jeff

jpt

BEWARE of this claim! You almost certainly cannot "renew the warranty." What you can do is buy an extended service contract (probably not directly from BMW), which has completely different rules from real car warranties. Coverage will likely not be the same, and laws that mandate warranty coverage in certain cases (for instance, a manufacturer cannot refuse warranty service based on the fact that you have modified the car unless they can prove that your modifications are responsible for the failure in question) do not apply to service contracts.

I cannot personally speak to the actual reliability of BMWs, as neither I nor any of my close friends have ever owned one. Consumer Reports says they are above average to excellent in every area except electrical where they are average. They do have slightly better resale value than Acuras, but this is largely due to their cachet -- there are always people who want to be seen in a BMW, and will just buy the newest one they can afford, so the depreciation is very gradual because there's someone lined up at every price point.

mrdeeno

Seeing how Honda's legendary reputation is only a "reputation", you should eliminate Honda/Acura, seeing that both are lower than Lexus, Toyota, and Infiniti.

This is 3-year data, so if someone can find longer-term data it may shed more light onto long-term reliability.

vitocorleone

Not according to an earlier post by Thorium (sp?) they don't - it's about the same.

vitocorleone

Also, I personally have never paid much attention to JDP stuff, regardless of whether they are saying good stuff or bad stuff. I have always trusted CR more.

TSX: Above average reliability
TL: Above average
BMW: too new (2005 was above average, 2004 was below average... flip the coin)
G35: Above average
Legacy: Above average

Also from CR, Honda trails Toyota for long-term reliability (from 5 years of surveys asking about 8 years of vehicles), followed by Subaru and then Nissan and finally Mazda. BMW is the most reliable European car, though it makes a Mazda look really good.

In other words, if you're looking for the most statistically reliable car and don't want a Toyota or Lexus because they tend to be boring and/or expensive, then Honda or Acura are the next best choice. That being said, a G35 or Legacy would undoubtedly be great as well.

(PS - off-topic, but it's funny that VWs make Chryslers look reliable)

Black_6spd

As a an engineer who once worked in the auto industry, these so-called reliability studies have no merit for us in its manufacturing community.

For starters, measuring simply occurences is a common pitfall and does not accurately depict the "quality" of a particular product. The main reason is that all "occurences" or in this case "complaints" do not have the same effect on the customer or the operation of the vehicle. For example, 500 occurences of a dashboard rattle would be weighed equally with 500 occurences of a major transmission failure where it placed lives in danger.

In automotive design, we counter this pitfall with FMEA ranking. We use the following attributes when ranking a failure mode:
O = Occurence score (1-10)
S = Severity score (1-10; 10 & 9 resulting in injury or death)
D = Detection (1-10)

In summary, the analysis provides good entertainment for folks like me.

nyi37

regarding the backseat space, doesnt the TSX and IS have similar space? since they are both compact cars i believe

CGTSX2004

iTrader: (1)

Nope. The IS is a compact, the TSX is actually a mid-size.

mrdeeno

That's great for you! You can "invalidate" any other statistical study as "good entertainment", yet you offer no alternative study or result, only an alternative method which does NOTHING for us.

EVERY study done to gauge reliability/quality/etc. is statistical in nature, so are you telling us that YOUR method is much more applicable and much more accurate in regards to long term reliability?

If it's such "good entertainment" for you, then why don't you share with us a study using your method in order for us to get a gauge on automaker reliabilities?

vitocorleone

I've worked with a lot of engineer-types and they've always entertained me a lot.

Self-reporting is not the best measure, especially when it is not correlated by real incident reports from the auto manufacturers who, frankly, seem to simply be "entertained" without wanting anyone to actually know how good or bad there products are. However, the CR survey is of a very high number of people (even given the high number of makes and models), so the results are statistically representative and likely to be accurate because of statistical power.

In other words, if reliability reports are ignored in the industry, it's no wonder so many car makes and models are crappy! Did you work for an American car maker?

I don't know JDP's methodology, but here's what CR states:

Reliability histories
Detailed Ratings for 1998 to 2005 models

How are cars holding up? The reliability history charts, included in each model's profile, give you the most comprehensive reliability information available to consumers. (To find our Ratings & reliability information go to our main Autos page and select a vehicle by make and model). These charts are based on more than 1,000,000 responses to our 2005 Annual Questionnaire. Consumer Reports subscribers reported on any serious problems they had with their vehicles during the previous year (April 1, 2004, through March 31, 2005) that they considered serious because of cost, failure, safety, or downtime, in any of the trouble spots included in the table below.

The scores in the charts are based on the percentage of respondents who reported problems in each of the 15 trouble spots. Because high-mileage cars tend to encounter more problems than low-mileage cars, problem rates are standardized to minimize differences due to mileage. The 2005 models were generally less than six months old at the time of the survey, with an average of about 3,000 miles.


HOW TO READ THE CHARTS

To check on the reliability history of a particular year's model, start with the Used Car Verdict. This score shows whether the model had more or fewer problems overall than the average model of that year, calculated from the total number of problems reported by subscribers in all trouble spots. Because problems with the engine, cooling system, transmission, and drive system can be serious and expensive to repair, our calculations give extra weight to problems in those areas.

To see how the model that's currently on sale is likely to hold up, look at the New Car Prediction at the bottom of each chart. For this rating, we averaged a model's Used Car Verdict for the newest three years, provided the vehicle did not change significantly in that time and hasn't been redesigned for 2006. We have found that several model years' data are a better predictor than the single most recent model year. One or two years' data may be used if the model was redesigned in 2005 or 2004, or if there were insufficient data for more years. Sometimes we include a prediction for a model that is new or has been redesigned, provided its reliability history or the manufacturer's track record has been consistently above average.

To see a model's individual strengths and weaknesses, look at the individual scores for each of the 15 Trouble Spots. The "Average Problem Rates" chart below shows the average problem rates for all models in the survey in each trouble spot. Scores are based on the percentage of survey respondents who reported problems for that trouble spot, compared with the average model of that year.

Models that score a are not necessarily unreliable, but have a higher rate of problems than the average model. Similarly, models that score are not necessarily problem-free, but had relatively few problems compared with other models.

Because problem rates in some trouble spots are very low, we do not assign a or a unless the model's problem rate exceeds 3 percent. If a problem rate is below 2 or 1 percent it will be assigned a or a respectively. In the charts, a model year in red identifies the year of a major redesign.

What the trouble spots include

Engine: Pistons, rings, valves, block, heads, bearings, camshafts, gaskets, supercharger, turbocharger, cam belts and chains, accessory belts, oil pump.

Cooling: Radiator, heater core, water pump, thermostat, hoses, intercooler, plumbing.

Transmission: Transaxle, gear selector and linkage, coolers and lines. (Note: We no longer provide separate data for manual transmissions and clutches since we usually receive an insufficient number of survey responses for these items.)

Drive system: (except transmission) Drive joints, drive axle(s), differential, wheel bearings, driveshaft, four-wheel-drive components, traction control, stability control.

Fuel: Fuel injection, computer and sensors, fuel pump, tank, emissions controls, "check engine" light.

Ignition: Spark plugs, coil, distributor, electronic ignition, sensors and modules, timing.

Electrical: Starter, alternator, battery, horn, gauges, wiper motor, wiring, lights.

Air conditioning: Compressor, condenser, evaporator, expansion valves, hoses, dryer, fans, electronics.

Suspension: Linkage, power-steering gear, pump, coolers and lines, alignment and balance, springs and torsion bars, ball joints, bushings, shocks and struts, electronic or air suspension.

Brakes: Hydraulic system, linings, rotors and drums, power boost, antilock system, parking brake and linkage.

Exhaust: Manifold, muffler, catalytic converter, pipes.

Paint/trim/rust: discoloring, chalking, peeling, cracking, loose trim, moldings, rust.

Body integrity: Seals, weather stripping, air and water leaks, wind noise, rattles and squeaks.

Power equipment: Power mirrors, sunroof, windows, doors and lift gates, central locks, cruise-control switches, power and memory for seat position, heated seats, keyless entry, audio system, navigational system, rear entertainment system.

Body hardware: Manual mirrors, sunroof, locks and latches, seat mechanisms, safety belts, glass defect

mrdeeno

^^^what he said.

you can argue this way and that way about how one method is more accurate or reliable than another, or even go as far as being conceded enough to call any other method except yours "entertainment".

It's very fallible to gauge reliability by personal experience or by a single case basis. even if 100 of your neighbors have the same car, it's probably fallibel to gauge it based on their experience.

in the end, we can only work with the information we have. JD, CR, etc. are the only published studies that are on a large enough scale to give us any clue about these makes...so even if you "think" your method is so much better that JD, CR, etc. are just entertainment to you, your method means absolute JACK if there are no published studies for us to use.

Come to think of it...10-15 years ago, I'm sure everyone at the domestic Big-3 said "These studies are entertainment to us...we make quality cars when measured by our method!"

bradykp

the thing is, these companies wait for the technology to be mastered. BMW and VW Group and Mercedes throw garbage into their cars, just because it's new, and don't bother to wait until they work out the kinks. I think of the Germans as the Microsoft of the auto industry. Their products are really amazing when they work, but you have to install too many patches to get them to work.

japanese carmakers seem to get it right when they do it, because they do all the R&D and make sure they get it done properly the first time.

mrdeeno

They just don't make'em like they used to...

I remember MB used to test drive every model for 100,000miles or something and fixing all the kinks and improving anything that can be improved prior to releasing a car for production/sale.

i guess with the competition nowadays, they have 4 years to design, test, manufacture and bring to market.

LuvMyTSX

I pulled this from another thread I put it in since I couldn't find it when I googled it.

From Consumer Reports Web Site
April 2006
Manufacturers as they age

Using data from the 2001-2005 surveys, we compared how the vehicle lines from the major manufacturers fared as their vehicles age. We combined manufacturers' problem rates for one-year-old vehicles from each of the five surveys and did the same for two year old vehicles, and so on.

Some key findings:
The Asian manufacturers are more reliable on average, and continue to age more gracefully.
American manufacturers still have not closed the gap between them and the Asians. Ford has been, and continues to be the most reliable among the domestic manufacturers for older vehicles.
The European manufacturers continue to lag behind. Mercedes-Benz has fallen off in recent years.

The chart: http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/...as-they-age.htm

And the thread I took it from: http://www.acura-tsx.com/forums/show...ht=reliability

Black_6spd

While I can understand where your coming from, I'm afraid you're blinded by your emotions in your case.

The main point of the matter is in regards to the intent of the person observing the report. If you want to be an armchair car junkie and debate on message boards about so-called quality of one brand against another, this type of information will sufice.

However, to say that JD, CR, (or whoever you call 'experts') provide engineers with sufficient data to actually measure and prevent these issues is a stretch. While you may think otherwise, my profession doesn't consist of my boss telling me, "I want you to go to your local magazine store to find out where our biggest opportunity lies." Use common sense. We have a whole field of study out there that doesn't consist of using a magazine to tell us how to improve. Yes, we do only read it for entertainment.

Since you asked, "our" foremost experts happen to be ISO, ASTM, SAE, etc NOT Car and Driver.