JediMindTricks

i voted for cheap because i believe it is for what it is. $30,000 is not small money to me, but relative to my other options and what i wanted in a car to purchase, the tsx was cheapest. perhaps value would be a better description for the tsx.

helraiser

Because it's a hassle dealing with Canada customs aka revenue canada aka government of canada when trying to bring it in. If I even gave someone $100 to do it they'd run. 'nuff said.

As far as me complaining about everyone else complaining about the same thing... uh... WTF?!

JayRoam

great value for its class... period.

kyotousa

if 3000 computer run better than ur computer u say it's overpriced?

i think overprice means a stuff is crap but you are paying over than what it should be
hence overpriced.....

If that is the price for high-end product then why is it overpriced...

kyotousa

don't u guys also need to pay import tax?

bradykp

is 27-30k a lot of money? yes....

but the question is, for the money, is this car a good value (cheap) or is it a rip off (expensive)

and the answer is that it's cheap. of course you can get a civic for 10k less, but it's no comparison. for what this car offers, and how well it holds its value, this car is cheap (no, not cheaply built, but a good value). this car was a steal at this price.

psteng19

I disagree.
For the money, the I4 Accord is a much better value.
You will never find a car that can match the options and specs of the TSX toe-to-toe but the Accord is pretty close, but at thousands less.

iTimmy

I disagree, I have a 2004 TSX-6mt-non.nav and I also have a 2004 Accord ex-5mt-w/leather-non.nav and the price difference is easily justified.

The cars are both 20 months old and have roughly the same mileage on them and the TSX interior is aging more gracefully, is MUCH faster(and niether are fast cars). The TSX has HID's, a better sounds system, better interior, 17" wheels, more power, a 6 speed, VSA(traction control), a better waranty, better handling and its a "flashier" car(if that matters). The only things the Accord has over the TSX, is Satelite radio, slightly larger interior and would be the better car to use during a crime because its a dime a dozen. The price difference was around $3k, when you add up the extra's I wish I got 2 TSX's.

lcrazyaznl

iTrader: (1)

Best investment for a car, thats 28k.

HoRRo

In the words of Moores (The Suit People), the TSX is:

Well Made, Well Priced, Well Dressed.

IMO, the TSX is priced decently in Canada. I don't find it expensive, but I won't fork out anything over 65K for a car as well.

psteng19

Using Edmund's TMV, the price difference for my region is a tad over $4,000 for a 6M TSX vs. 5M Accord inline-4 EX w/leather.

So the question becomes whether all the extras of the TSX is worth $4k more (add tax and it becomes closer to $4500).
For me, the Accord was never in consideration because I just don't like the looks of it, but I find it a much better value for the general populace.

And for the bolded section...
I'm sure that's on top of the checklist of features when it comes time to buy a car.
So I guess you plan to commit a crime, or you've already done so?

markcoburn

I wish there waws an option to vote "just right". Because I cant say that it's cheep or expensive. If it was 5 grand less, it would be cheep. 5 more and I'd say expensive.

Saviving > 5 grand on an equaly equiped civic makes the civic seem like a better value than the TSX. My wife didn't like how the Civic looks compaired to the TSX. ...so it was out.

I figured the TSX was more sporting than a Civic EX and more acomodating than a Civic SI, so I didn't mind loosing a little value.

I think that the TSX is priced just right if you are willing to work to get the price within $1000 of invoice. That extra $1000 is just an aditional instant depreciation.

iTimmy

In 2004 when both cars were purchased new you were paying damn near retail on the TSX, but could get larger discounts on the Accord(which is why my cheap ass ended up with one over another TSX). I could give a rats ass what retail to retail is, I like real life numbers and in my case the real difference was around $3k

Not another uptight, anal retentive TSX owner

That statement was said in jest, meaning Accords are EVERYWHERE as where the TSX is not - got it? (yes, that last part was a joke again)

HoRRo

ahaahha, this thread is getting interesting.

If I wanted to commit a crime in mine, I just wouldn't wash it for a week or two and it would turn into a dirty PWP TSX, lol.

psteng19

Oh ok, it went right over my head

97AcuraCL

my thoughts exactly.

hawaiiantsx

wouldnt cheap or expensive be based on your personal income?it may be cheap to someone who earns 100k a year and expensive to someone who earns 30k a year

iTimmy

Of course

bradykp

psteng, i'm with tireguy. you're talking about real money difference of approx 3,000-3,500. and your tax calculations are assuming around a 12% tax rate. i dunno where you live, but that's crazy.

anyways, the comprable honda 4 door sedan with leather and navi is about 3k less according to edmonds. not to mention the options you lose, the crappier leather (IMO), and the 40 Horsepower , the TSX holds it value better and is a bit more unique. worth every bit of difference if you ask me.

bluetooth and memory seats along with the 40hp is enough for me

waTSX

And without the sporty demeanor, which is what many of us purchased the TSX for in the first place. Thousands less and not nearly as much fun to drive.

psteng19

A 6 speed TSX which Edmund's TMV quotes $27,298.
With NJ 6% tax (which I'm sure you're familiar with ), it comes to $28,935.

A 5 speed Accord EX w/leather, Edmund's quotes $23,057.
With tax, that comes out to $24,440.

$28,935 - $24,440 = $4,495

bradykp

and i compared the auto to auto and navi to navi.

the 5 speed accord EX w/leather & navi i priced at 25,669 pre tax on edmunds

the 5 speed tsx w/leather and navi i purchased was 28,200.

28,200 - 25,669 = $2,531 if you add the tax difference that adds another whopping $151.86 for a grand total of $2,682.86 for the TSX.

i got 41 more horsepower, bluetooth hands free, memory seats, HID lights, a car that holds it's value better, nicer leather, nicer interior overall, and if anyone else wants to add the other positives (like not seeing a TSX every 3rd car when walking around Hoboken) feel free to add to my post.

i'm sure there's a bunch of other things i don't really know about the Accord that the TSX has over it.

psteng19

The person who posted about his Accord and TSX bought the manual variants of each. I also would've chosen manual for either one as well.

You're TSX price also reflects a negotiated price.
Your Accord price does not. Apples to apples please

bradykp

that brings the argument to 25,029

28,200 - 25,029 = 3,171

adding $500 to your side of the argument, and still not swaying me

psteng19

Actually it's $31,000 - $27,200 = $3,800 difference.
Again, numbers are from Edmund's TMV.

I'm not trying to persuade you or anyone else, as I know most who are on these forums have already made up their minds, or view from different persepctives.

I'm just saying that the TSX isn't the best value when you compare it to the Accord or other cars not mentioned.
For the generic public or non-car enthusiast, the Accord is probably the better buy.
$4000 is quite a bit of money for all but the most affluent.

hans007

i would say compared to

bmw 325i, lexus is250, audi a4 2.0 mercedes c230 and the like... it is dirt cheap.

against say a camry or something ok its a little expensive. its all relative. its not quite to the prestige level of those 4 other cars, but i'd say actual quality and driving it probably is only worse than the 325i and only a little bit at that. not to mention 10 grand less equipped the same way.

cusetsx

To compare a TSX to a Accord EX is like comparing a Jetta to a A4. OBVIOUSLY the TSX is MORE expensive.. it's.... an.. ACURA.
The question should be what do you GET for your money and is what you get for your money WORTH it to you the BUYER.
When I was comparison shopping I (long story short) decided to stick with Honda. I had a 2001 prelude MT. My wife was about to have a child and I needed something with 4 doors and (sadly) AT so she could drive either car in a pinch. I compared a Accord V6 EX (non navi) to a TSX Non NAVI. Why V6? Because I figured I should compare cars fairly close in price range. Even though the V6 Accord had more oomph, I just couldn't get over the "jenny craig needin'" body style. So I went with the TSX. Could I have saved money with the Accord? Some yah.. with rebate offers etc etc. However, I had to buy a car that I would plan on having more than 5 years. I couldn't just settle for the "cheaper" car just for the sake of money.

Anyway my (not as cheap as )

bradykp

ok, even if you are right....$4,000 translate to about $80 on amonth monthly payment.

but, you aren't using the right numbers. even if you use msrp for the TSX, it's 30,505, not $31,000.

but, no one is paying msrp plus destination (the 30,505 figure). everyone is getting it for much lower with little negotiation.

i paid $28,200 for the 06 TSX with navi. so that's the number you should be using to compare, not $31,000

and what is $27,200 for the accord? i see $26,150 as the msrp. + $550 destination is $26,700. still though, people arent paying that. in nj, edmunds says people are paying 25,029

so the numbers are:

28,200 - 25,029 = 3,171 which is 600 less than what you came up with.

it's a better car than the accord 4 cyl hands down. i decided between the two vehicles, and once i saw the options on the 2006, it was a no brainer. as long as i didnt have to pay full price (30,505), the TSX was a much better value at only $3,000 - $3,500 more ($60-70/mo difference in my payments).

the TSX has more horsepower, memory seats, nicer leather, bluetooth, sportier feel to the car, rarer car, holds value slightly better, handled better on the test drive, rode smoother, and on and on and on.

the first time i saw the prices of the accords i thought "wow, not as much as i expected for the price"

bradykp

i agree with you cuse. the TSX had so much more to offer, for pennies more IMO.

cusetsx

I actually get a good discount with Chrysler, Ford, and GM products via my company and I STILL went with more expensive deal. I looked at the Dodge Magnum and a Mazda 3s (via Ford). I could have saved even more money going that route. I'm glad I sticked to my "halo" car though.

bradykp

my dad can take advantage of Ford's X-Plan, so we looked at the volvo s40 turbo AWD. coulda got it for about 24/25k after the x-plan and incentives. was the TSX expensive compared to that deal? YES. but a volvo for a 23/24 yr old? cmon. also considered the mazda 6, but the interior just looks too damn cheap. other ford products (Except the Stang) scare me. My dad's company goes through trucks like an alcoholic goes through whisky. the tranny's all go bad. now if the taurus SHO was still around and in a manual.....we might have a tougher decision making process.

GM, i have a credit card from them and have like, $1500 earned towards a car, but i can't find a GM car right now that really makes my head turn. the trans am would be nice, but it's not around. took the pontiac g6 for a test spin months ago, boring.

So, aside from the deal on the volvo, the TSX was by far the best option. if the civic was slightly bigger, i like the style of that too. but that damn thing is on every corner too.

cusetsx

If I didn't have to think about gas mileage, that Dodge Charger looks nice, but I'd have to get the AWD version.....crappy gas mileage.

bradykp

oh i think the new charger is atrocious. to each his own. they took a classic muscle car and, although the did well with the power, they gave it no designa t all. all the new dodge's look the same to me. the new pontiac GTO is depressing too.

the new mustang is the only classic muscle car with sleek design right now.

waTSX

cusetsx

True, each to their own. If Ford made a 4 door car inline with the abilities of the Mustang I'd probably be interested. I'm no longer in the market for a 2 door.
And yes... they probably should have made the Charger a 2 door car with a more distinct body style from the 300/Magnum. I think the marketting idea is that 2 doors don't sell as well as 4 doors. So went the days of the Camaro/Firebird/IROC and really only leaving the Mustang as the king of the 2 door hill (supercars not included). The Pontiac GTO is a weak attempt from GM if you ask me. It was designed in Australia and just rebadged as the GTO... no offense to any Ausies.
But I think we digress from the topic of the thread. :wink: