haha...she wasn't bad looking either

 

sooooooooo, mod the hell out of your TSX.

 

Wait until you see the what the AT is worth in resale. The MT blows it away. If you are looking for a break even point figure 27 months. Maybe there some mods u can do to make it more tolerable. I have an 06 MT and have a blast with it. It more than makes up for the power squeeze with it's handling. With creative shifting blended with it's handling ability and creature comforts. I more than hold my own. I don't get tickets. Most inportant when the traffic gets crazy I am one comfortable guy. My friend the grass is not greener. I am 52 and when it comes to auto's . I have been there, done it. Vettes, a 928 porsche, Jag, etc. Your part and service bill is nowhere near as costly as the Germans. Slow down abit check out your options with the TSX and enjoy what u have!!

 

And a 2.0t with software will hit low 14s in the 1/4

at an ex riced out civic owner complaining about the TSX. Did you not test drive the car before buying it? What did you expect, you arent driving a cheap car so of course aftermarket parts wont be cheap. BMW and Audi dont have cheap parts to mod either. Exhaust alone is over 1k for the A4.

If you want cheap parts then buy a civic... oh wait.

What else would you buy for under 30k that has all the gadgets or style that the TSX has? The A4 is way over 30k with decent options.

 

If you miss your Civic you got to try the 07 SI, it runs circle around TSX. My MT time is over, I am too old for it otherwise, I would have bought one.

 

While I'm postive an A4 2.0T is quicker than a TSX, to the best of my knowledge they have not been compared head to head in any comparo I've seen. until that happens we can only guess on how much faster the A4 is. Quoting times from magazines is pointless since several factors account for the times acheived.

If anything the TSX is underrated. Sure is could use more power, but besides that find me a better car for 26 to 29K.

 

Having owned both I have to somewhat disagree. The MT is more fun, sure, but its not because its faster. The MT is just so sweet to use it makes driving the car that much more enjoyable. I thought the AT could use more oomph and that hasn't changed with the MT. In fact, I kinda feel the car's character is better suited to the AT.

 

Most definitely .

A turbocharged vehicle will always benefit more from a software update because what is really changed is just the boost level. It's much more difficult to achieve significant hp gains on an N/A vehicle with software alone.

Heck, they were taking the 150 hp 1.8T's to 210 hp (and torque from 160 or so up to 240 lb-ft) just by changing the boost from 0.6 bar (about 8 psi) to 1 bar (about 15 psi).

 

Go drive a A4 6MT and then a TSX 6MT. Until you do, arguing this "by the numbers" is pointless.

 

tsx is a very well balanced car. not the most powerful, but good enough for 95% of your daily grind. a ton of features standard. honda reliability. high resale. pretty decent gas mileage. all for under 30k OTD. these are the reasons why i bought a tsx. in this price range, there's nothing that beats the tsx.

 

The more preferred question should be are the TL and TL-S overrated? j/k.

 

hmm...that is a better question. if anything, i think the TSX is incredibly underrated. It's the Rodney Dangerfield of Hondas; it gets no respect. Ever. Honda/Acura doesn't know how to sell it, or who to sell it to. I'm glad it's not more popular here in the US. It makes me feel smarter.

 

And yet the TSX still sells like hotcakes.

 

i got 01 teggy and 06 tsx..the teg is 10000000% stock other than a shift knob and it is indeed quicker than the tsx

 

I guess someone is going to start one of these threads about once every 2-3 weeks.

 

I decided to retract my previous statement about "by the numbers".

Let's look at the impact of all this on typical driving. I plugged the crank torque, gear ratios, and curb weight of both cars to see which one has the better weight/torque. Here are the the results (smaller weight/torque is better)

TSX ........ A4 .........TSX Advantage
1.28 ...... 1.16 ..... -9.08%
2.22 ...... 2.08 ..... -6.43%
3.07 ...... 3.00 ..... -2.28%
4.05 ...... 4.13 ...... 2.04%
5.03 ...... 5.32 ...... 5.86%
6.32 ...... 6.45 ...... 2.04%

So, we see that the A4 really has an advantage only in 1st and 2nd, and the TSX pulls harder in gears 4, 5, and 6 -- an actual performance advantage in the gears that get more driving time.

In 5th gear in particular, the gear you spend most of your time driving in anywhere but the interstate, the TSX has a 6% advantage.

Also, the A4 only achieves these numbers at full turbo boost, so you don't get even get this response immediately when you increase the throttle pressure, which makes the TSX responsiveness even better than these numbers indicate.

(Detailed spreadsheet available on request... )

 

Can anyone validate this?

 

Nice chart...Im curious though if your comparing the Quattro or Cvt as there are weight differences. In general the Audi is about 400-500lbs heavier than a TSX. Most mags usually compare the TSX to the GLI which is a better comparison.

The rest really depends on your style of driving. I disagree with you as i live in the inner city and use gears 1-4 the most and is why i decided on the 2.0T over the TSX because for everyday driving it just had way more usuable power . I dont usually get into 5-6 gears unless im on the freeway and the power is still very good. Also you cant really compare the old 1.8T to the 2.0T for throttle response as its virtually non existent in the 2.0

 

I think the problem is that everyone over estimates VTEC. When people drive it for the first time they think its going to put you into a time warp or something. I was expecting much more after hearing so much about it and was really disapointed after driving the car several times.

 

I miss my 95 Integra SE. MUCH more fun to drive than the TSX, even 6MT (but the TSX is more comfortable). TSX feels like a tank in comparison. Oh well, maybe Acura will bring the Integra back some day.

 

Actually, I used 3253 as the TSX weight and 3428 for the Audi. Also, I neglected to adjust for the TSX figures being "SAE net" versus those for the Audi, so they're off about 3%. Here is the revised chart. Now gears 3-6 are all in the TSX column.

..... TSX ........ A4 .........TSX Advantage
1 .. 1.24 ...... 1.16 ..... -6.36%
2 .. 2.15 ...... 2.08 ..... -3.62%
3 .. 2.98 ...... 3.00 ...... 0.66%
4 .. 3.93 ...... 4.13 ...... 5.10%
5 .. 4.88 ...... 5.32 ...... 9.04%
6 .. 6.14 ...... 6.45 ...... 5.10%

Yes, driving style and specfic car makes a difference. I drove a GTI and would have seriously considered it had a 4 door 6MT been available in the color/option package I wanted.

I hear you about driving style, but I can and will compare a 1.8T to the 2.0T. Coming from a 150 hp 1.8T, I found the turbo lag in the 2.0T to be very noticeable. Anytime you're driving at a constant speed (certainly at city speeds anyway, 80 mph is different) and not accelerating or going up a grade, the turbo isn't generating any boost, nor is it spinning anwhere near as fast is does when under full throttle. In fact, under these conditions the engine is pulling a vacuum just an N/A car. You don't go from negative PSI to +0.8 bar (around 12 PSI) the instant you hit the throttle.

 

I never said I havn't driven one. I actually happen to know a co-worker of mine that has one...and yes....I have driven it. I don't care what kind of flow charts and pie graphs or mathematical formulas you have. I have driven the two...I have fealt the two. I have also seen the numbers on the two from various magazines. And like the other guy said....I do MOST of my driving in a city, I'm not on the autobahn and I don't drive on highways all day long where 5th and 6th gear even matter.

 

Unless you spend all your time in 1st or 2nd, the TSX is faster.

It has a better wheel torque/weight ratio in gears 3, 4, 5, and 6.

Enough said.

 

Where do you get your numbers from and what years are you comparing? Look at any car magazine other than the Car and Driver link you pulled up and it shows. Year per year the A4 2.0T is faster than the TSX. We'r sitting here talking about two of the slowest cars I've ever driven. This is like judgeing a speed competition between a sloth and AIDS.

 

2007 A4 and TSX.

The numbers are the published torque, curb weight, and gear ratios from each manufacturer. TSX torque adjusted +3% since Acura reports SAE numbers and Audi does not:

Gear Ratios TSX A4
1 3.27 3.67
2 1.88 2.05
3 1.36 1.42
4 1.03 1.03
5 0.83 0.8
6 0.66 0.66
Final 4.76 3.89


Torque 168.92 207
Weight 3257 3428

The math shows the TSX with a superior torque to weight ratio (at the wheels, due to gearing) except in 1st and 2nd gear. That doesn't mean the car is faster overall, but in the gears you spend most of the time in, it pulls harder.

 

 

Dude you keep going by math and ratios. Look at the numbers of the 06' 2.0T and the 06 TSX, they show "actual numbers" that have already been tested. I don't need to look at gear ratios and mathematical forumulas when I have their numbers in front of me. This has been discussed ad nauseum, adios.

 

Not everyone finds the AT "slow" or even cares beyond if it's "fast enough". Yes, it's fast enough for some, and that's not why it was purchased. Furthermore, just because someone bought a TSX, even an AT TSX, doesn't mean they couldn't have afforded the TL or G35 or a 3-series, or, hell, an M5. <---me

You know the sayings about assumptions....

 

People who own or have at least driven the TSX know what the car offers. First and foremost the reason I bought one is because of the Honda engine that balances fuel economy, power, smoothness and reliability. A pleasant bonus is that the engine sounds quite nice when you engage the VTEC at the high end. Also, the exterior styling and handling is much better than the Accord. Plus, the features in this price range is unbeatable. Finally, the interior styling is really nice with some unbelievably clear and comprehensive gauges. Overall the entire package is really solid.

If there's one thing that I'm a little disappointed with is the mild case of vibration in the passenger A-pillar and the driver seat creaking when turning left or right. The driver seat was fixed under warranty when I had the first oil change done. I plan to address the A-pillar issue on my next oil change. Otherwise the car has been great and I'm glad I bought one when I did.

 

Until they are tested head to head ie, same day, same track, the actual numbers mean next to nothing.

 

Anyone who disregards the laws of physics because a magazine on a particular day with a particular driver with particular weather and track conditions got a particular time is being a little short sighted. The laws of physics don't change; all those other variables do.

Now let's be honest, the 2.0t is going to be a quicker car at lower speeds. The 2.0t is going to turn in better 0-60 and 1/8 times because of it's 1st and 2nd gear advantages. At highway speeds the tsx is just as quick or quicker.

A few tenths in a quarter mile or 0-60 is not a huge margin. It's a few car lengths at most. The sort of thing that is easily offset by spinning the tires too much.

The tsx isn't fast, but it's been a great car for me over the last 4 years and I appreciate it for what it does well. When I pick up my 335 in august my girlfriend will be driving the tsx so I'll do some side by side comparisons!

 

well said man. this car is what it is. and it's not anything more than that. people knew what they were getting with this car.

i think instead of thinking of what more you could have, think of how big of an upgrade over the civic it was, and be happy with your nice TSX for a few more years. any car you get...the weaknesses will start to bother you after you've had it for a year or so.

 

i got the impression he was saying that the acura was just as expensive as audi or porsche. which i think is flat wrong, but i didnt seem to interpret that he thinks he'll save money with either of those makes.

 

i have to respectfully disagree with you.

obviously, the MT is a better transmission and you're used to it, but the AT compared with other ATs is not all that underpowered. I do fine with it on highways and in NYC traffic when i need to cut off a cabbie. if you know how to drive this AT well, it can be perfectly fine. it's not as weak as people make it out to be.

 

it stands out well enough in hoboken. guess we don't have people as obsessed over ricers as out in your neck of the woods.

i personally think ricers are hideous, and i can't stand civics.

every person that sees my car comments on how sleek it looks and then if they get in and see the navi and the interior, they're always impressed. the look on someone's face the first time they get in this car is priceless.

 

YES:

The TSX indeed is overrated.

Pros.
On par luxury interior with all the bells and whistles anyone would ever want
Great handling
Looks fucking awesome.

Cons.
Need more power
to much road noise
to much engine noise in cabin.

We got a TL, TSX, and RSX.

I compared the our 01TL vs the 06 TSX. My 01 TL is still quicker and quiter... The RSX is also quicker...

Again the TSX does have the best features. Bang for the buck TSX hands down.

 

i passed a guy driving with his wife one day on the highway....he was at least 55.

i've seen more than a few middle-aged women driving our tsx. oh well.

 

so take it into your dealership and have the seat fixed. i did it with mine and the creaking went away. they just needed to realign it on it's rails or something.

 

i understood what you said after you responded to DC82's criticism of your post. i agree with you, definitely more fun to drive.

 

from what i've seen for sale used the AT does very well in resale. the MT i thought was the one that lagged a bit since the demand for it is lower. it's tough to sell a manual these days (sad truth )