I saw a TSX in person the other day and reallly liked it. I do wish Honda could make something like it in RWD. Anyway I was looking at the specs and noticed that the curb weight is around 3200 pounds! How could that be? A BMW 325, which is similar in size, but has a 6 cylinder engine, has a similar curb weight. What did Honda put in this car to make it weigh so much? Maybe the suspension isn't all-aluminum like the 3? I assume the engine is completely aluminum so that doesn't explain it. It seems like a car of the TSX's size w/ a 4 cylinder should weigh around 2900 pounds.

 

TSX is indeed a relatively heavy car, but......that's not right about the BMW being similar in size.

The BMW 3 (sedan) is over 7" shorter and almost 1" narrower. Weight is indeed about the same as TSX.

 

Yea the TSX is slightly bigger then all the other cars in its class. I like small but the TSX isn't that much bigger but im guessing big enough to add a few hundred pounds.

 

a4 which share similar dimensions(slightly smaller I think) weigh MORE than the tsx. C230 also weighs more. Is300s which are dimensionally smaller also weigh about the same. It's the nature of the segment, high quality materials + high strength suspensions + big wheels etc = weight

6 cylinder vs 4 cylinder debate is more or less moot. it isn't about cylinders it's about displacement and configuation. The tsx uses an I4. An I6 like in the 3 series probalby doesn't way more than 50-100 lbs more than the tsx powertrain. Now if you went to a V-6 you would be looking at a 300lb or so gain. That's why most car makers use forced induction four cylinders or inline 6s in this class to save weight.

 

Raises an interesting point which we haven't gotten into very much, either here or on the old site.

Although we often talk about TSX and cars like the 3-series as being in the same "class," they really aren't, because their sizes are significantly different (really). And, there aren't many cars that are truly in TSX's "class." It's a class in between the "little" luxury/near luxury cars and the so-called "mid-size" ones (which actually are pretty big). In the "little" class, you've got a bunch of cars -- the BMW 3's, Audi A4, Lexus IS300, Mercedes C, Volvo S40 and S60, and probably a couple of others. The so-called mid-size also includes a big bunch, including the TL and TL-S (I mean the current ones), BMW 5's, Mercedes E, Volvo S80, Infiniti I35, and ES300; if you feel like it you could also say Accord, Maxima, Altima etc.

The TSX really isn't in either class -- it's in the middle, along with just a very few other cars: Infiniti G35, Jag X, Saab 9-3 -- and I think that's totally it.

This assumes you agree that size is a strong determining factor. Judging from some the TL threads, a lot of people might not agree.

For me this was a very strong deciding factor in picking a car. This "mid-mid-size" really has characteristics of its own, different from the 3-series types and the 5-series types -- and it's exactly the type of car that I prefer. The dearth of such cars was the main reason I had such a hard time finding a car before the TSX came out.

So, to me, really it misses the mark to keep talking about TSX being in the same class as the 3-series etc. It's not that TSX isn't as good; it's that it is a different type of car, because it's just enough bigger to put it in a different category.

 

one thing to keep in mind is the Bimmers, MB, Audi in addition to their larger motors (execpt for 1.8T), the RWD/AWD layout also add weight as well.

 

Gilboman: The Audis at the A4's are FWD not RWD.

And i think that size matters more to the TSX because it is supposed to be a smaller sports sedan. The people who look toward the TL knows that the handling will not be the same as the TSX. Aiming for a car of that size i guess it doesn't really matter much add a few inches here or there. Or at least it does matters more for the TSX as the few inches can make a huge difference. I wouldn't mind the TSX as small as a 3-series or a C-class.

 

The IS300 could have been a true performer if they got that iron block relic out from under the hood and put an all aluminum version in from the very start

 

Maybe you'd mind it more than you think.

I certainly would have. If the TSX were 7 inches shorter (yes, that's what the BMW 3 is), the ride would be significantly worse. That's before we even get into anything about interior space.

The ride factor alone would have put the car totally out of the running for me.

 

Oh i meant that with just the the size in mind, leaving the fact that a lot about the car would change in the process.

 

Safety has been a VERY high priority for Honda in the past 5 years especially. You'll notice that Civics can now weigh up to 2700 pounds (even a bit more for the hybrid versions)

5 star safety rating is a must now for almost all Hondas. The TSX/Euro Accord is meant to go directly after the safety conscious and as such it is a heavier car than you would think.

The other benefit to this safety factor is a very very rigid chassis. You have all noticed it if you push your cars a bit, the tires will give way long before the suspension will. A great suspension setup doesnt amount to a darn thing if the chassis is flexing.

If you read reviews of the US Accord especially, some writers have said that the chassis of the new Accord went from "bank vault solid to Fort Knox" and it really shows.

 

Arg then why is the insurance so high?!?!?!

 

This in-between size is one of the major factors that is drawing me towards the TSX. For me, Civic-size is too small, and 2003-Accord-size is too big.

However, given the above, I am surprised that the TSX is less spacious inside than the Civic. For example, in terms of head room and leg room, they are about the same in the front, but the Civic has more leg room in the back.

On the Audi website, they list the A4 1.8T as 76.3" wide. Is that a misprint? That would make it 6.5" wider than the TSX, that's like the width of a mini-van or a Grand Marquis!

 

Because the TSX is FWD it was necessary for Honda engineers to create a longer chassis to offset the drivetrain weight and create a more centered weight distribution? It allows designers/engineers to create more "usable" space in FWD cars while creating better handling in the process. Something that would prove to be more difficult in RWD cars without bigger/heavier engines (ie G35).

 

the power drivers seat weighs like 50 lbs more than a regular seat, that adds a lot of weight. the sunroof adds weight too, i believe. if you're concerned about weight, lose some, or take out the jack, and other things in the trunk. oh yeah, and the 6 speed is much lighter than the auto

 

my insurance is about $750 for six months...the type of car is factored into your insurance but there are also a lot of other factors that are calculated in. For example, your age, driving history, married/single, where you live, amt of coverage, deductibles for comp/collision, etc.

 

I think the TSX is in the entry-level sports/luxury segment, along with A4, BMW 3 series, 9-3, just like Acura said when they announced the car. The TSX's back seat has a little more leg room and hip room than the other cars in this segment, but that's about it for the functional size difference.
To put it another way, I cross-shopped the TSX against the A4 and the 9-3 when I was buying my car. They were all the "right" size for me -- seating for 4 adults. The TSX just did a better job with the back seat.

 

OK, guys, there is no magic to make your weight disappear, the weight you see on many cars are bone stock cars, no options, once you added all the options in it will be a lot heavier.

As for why the TSX is bigger, well, maybe because it's build on Honda's global midsize platform? If I rememeber correctly, TSX is actually the smallest model on that platform, it can't go much smaller.

 

unless you add in AWD or smth, there can't be that much weight added..the most i think is the sunroof..which is like 30-40lbs tops.

 

how is it much lighter....like 30lbs?

 

i believe more, i'd say at least 40lbs.

 

Close to 100lbs.

6MT 3230, 5AT 3318

 

I think you're missing the point. Even when you normalize the insurance costs to one driver with a specific driving record, the TSX's insurance costs are a bit of an anomaly.

Since I was looking at quite a few cars, I decided to get insurance quotes for them all. Here's what I was quoted.

Acura TSX - $1270/yr
Infiniti G35 Coupe - $1216/yr
BMW 325i Sedan - $1216/yr
BMW 330i Sedan - $1250/yr
Audi A4 3.0 Frontrak - $1198/yr
Audi A4 3.0 Quattro sedan - $1326/yr (obviously)

I mean, this car doesn't cost nearly as much as its competitors, and has to be cheaper to repair. Does that strike anyone as odd, or is it just me?

 

G35 coupe HAS to be more than that, it's 2 doors, and costs $8,000 more. it is odd though, maybe because it's a completely new model?

 

Maybe in your area, there is a high theft rate for Honda cars.

 

Maybe so. For a while, my wife's Honda Civic LX (with it's 115HP 4cyl) cost $14 more per year to insure than my old Jetta VR6... Go figure?

 

doesnt seem odd... a lot of riceboy idiots drive Acura/Honda and their accident rate from the stupid stuff they do affect all Honda/Acura drivers and since Honda/Acura parts are mostly interchangable between their cars, they are stolen a lot more often as well.

 

It's a misprint. Good find! The correct width is 69.5, not 76.3.

This is another great example of how "data" can be funny, even very simple things. On another thread I mentioned how Consumer Guide keeps making this same error (only worse) on the width of the Mini Cooper. People and organizations often just put numbers down without thinking, so you sometimes get "data" that go against the simplest common sense, really ridiculous things -- and then, someone else who's also not thinking will take that data and build all kinds of things on it, and no one will catch it, and before you know it, you might have terrible things happening. And I'm talking just about things that are VERY EASY to measure and VERY EASY to understand. Imagine the errors that can be made on more complicated measurements.

Which brings us to "interior room," TSX vs. Civic. I don't know if errors were made, but the official numbers are hard to fathom. Actually, contrary to what you might think from what some people are saying, most of TSX's official parameters are larger (a little). Some of them are smaller -- and, as Reader1 said, it's hard to understand how that could be. But, even aside from measurements, a few people have said they feel the Civic is roomier in the rear. One obvious possible explanation is that TSX puts a lot more room for the front (which the numbers DON'T show). Other than that, I don't know.

 

Methinks it has something to do with the absence of a rear tunnel in the Civic. Also, the shape of the rear seat pads are different. I'd agree with those who say the Civic has a roomier back seat. It just 'feels' bigger, but you can tell that most of it is kind of an optical illusion. Compared to the A4 (and even the G35 sedan), the TSX has tons of room in the back.

 

It is an illusion, the Civic feels/looks roomier but it isn't but its good enough to make a sale.

The TSX has high insurance most likely because of all the parts that can be yanked out and put in other cars.

My '97 TL is cheaper for insurance than other Hondas or Acuras simply because its parts can't be stuffed into a Civic. Good luck putting a longitudially mounted 3.2 V6 into a Civic

 

"Rear tunnel" -- What's that?

BTW, kenbiddulph, about the Civic looking and feeling roomier but it's an illusion: If it feels roomier, isn't that what it's all about?

 

i'm pretty sure the new civic is larger in every dimension than my sister's 95 accord. it's amazing how much bigger cars have gotten in the past 10 years

 

Don't have data for '95, but:

'94 Accord: length 184, width 70
new Civic: length 174.6, width 67.5

Still, your basic point is right. Cars have been getting bigger -- which has made it harder for some of us to find a car.


Pssssssst: The TSX is a '94 Accord. Pass it on.

 

shhhhh, you shouldn't tell anyone that. i know the civic has smaller dimensions than the old accord, but interior room seems very similar in size.

i really want to pick up a mid 90's accord 5 speed, that was my favorite body style for the accord, although my dad's 2000 accord isn't bad, it's just a lot bigger.

 

haha, calm down, he was joking

 

Donut is right -- I was joking. Don't worry, I'm one of TSX's biggest fans -- and beyond.
On "the old site" I even started a thread saying that TSX might be the "Best Car Up to $80K."

I was just commenting on the surprising fact that the cars have almost identical dimensions.

 

the lack of the "rear tunnel"(bump in the middle of the rear passenger floor is the reason teh civic rates so high for room. It's also the reason why the rear suspension sucks...it had to be designed to not enter that space which is a HUGE comproise in performance.

 

larch is all about the size and dimensions! i don't get how size is that important, i hate seeing all these old people driving around in town cars and S500's and 7 series. like they need that big of a car??? it's dangerous....

 

Donut, I think you might be a genius but I don't see how you could still be misunderstanding this.

Nobody ever said "bigger is better." The point is just, size is an important factor in determining the nature of the car.

About that, there's no controversy at all. I admit that I take it a step further -- i say it's THE MOST IMPORTANT factor, which is debatable.

 

more important than the mighty mighty manual transmission factor??? oh i'm sorry larch, you don't know anything about that