my friend has a 04 tl and i have an 03 cls . my car beats him everytime at the track my best is a 14.4 with just intake and his a 14.8 with intake . both autos and the 14.8 was with me driving his car , the best he got in his car was a 15.01 ......so cls will beat a 04 05 06 tl no prob .

 

somethin must be wrong with my cls..everytime i drive my sisters 05 TL it feels like it picks up quicker and definatly smoother..

 

I agree, the new TL is not necessarily faster than our 01 CL stock to stock. sometime ago I had the new TL loaner, and back then my CLS only had spring and sway nothing else in terms of engine enhancement. I did few run, CLS definitely was faster on straight line.

However, on curve, the new TL killed CLS. I think it is mostly due to the LSD on the TL. So those with 03 CLS 6SP can shine some light on handling.

 

I drove a 05 TL that was on a used car lot. My CL-S definitely felt quicker, stronger and more solid. I was surprised. The tL had 23,000 miles; my CL-S has 44,000.

 

it's safer to say this if you're referring to a 6spd CLS. it would be a different story if it were say a '02 CLS vs. say a '05 TL M/T.

 

well one thing is for sure, I/H on 2nd gen CL/TL gives 32whp. stock vs stock i would say its a drivers race, with an edge to the 2nd gen.

styling, handling, etc i gotta go with the 3rd gen TL. although 6spd cl-s with suspension/handling upgrades can handle pretty well

 

I raced one of the member here that had the 05 TL auto and i had a 01cl-s I/H and i beat him by 3 cars. It was a 1/4 mile race at Floyd Bennate Field (howard beach meet).

 

A good source for stock 0-60 times is http://www.albeedigital.com/supercou...0-60times.html

 

I thought they improved the weight distribution and your car isnt as long (boat-ish) as our car.

 

SOMETHING MUST BE WRONG. there is no way a 2003- TLS stock 4 stock beat a 2003- cls stock BECOS THE CL-S WEIGHS LESS AND GIVEN THE SAME HP SAME ENGINE IT DOESNT MAKE SENSE.

I ALWAYS THOUGHT THE CLS WAS A TAD QUICKER THAN THE TL GIVEN A GOOD LUNCH 4 BOTH.

ACCORDING TO ABOVE SITE

1997 Acura 2.2CL 8.9 16.7
2002 Acura 3.2CL Type S 6.8 15.0
1996 Acura 3.2TL 8.1 16.4
1999 Acura 3.2TL 7.4 15.7
2002 Acura 3.2TL Type S 6.2 14.8
2003 Acura 3.2CL Type-S 6.5 14.9

 

those are all estimates... you have to account for elevation, temperature, track conditions...
i would say that you can give or take 0.5 seconds to those times as tested by others such as road and track mag and members on this forum.... i think 15sec 1/4 mile for a cls auto is slow... i would think it would be like 14.5sec (average)

 

I KNOW BUT I AM TALKING RELATIVELY , IF U LOOK ALL THE TIMES ON THE TLS ARE BETTER THAT THAN THE CLS SAME YEAR/SAME ENGINE EITHER WAY.

U KNOW REALTIVE COMPARISM

 

The 6 speed TL averages about .6 sec faster than the auto's in the 1/4 mile. The auto TL feels so damn slow. My friend has one, and I was no where near impressed. I've read that the 6 speed TL was about .6 sec faster in the 1/4 mile though, havent ridden in one of those.

I would have my money on the auto CLS over the auto TL (3rd gen) anyday.

 

I thought there was some differences in the engines? Not sure though, but I could have sworn I read something about them. Aren't they J32A3's?

 

Nevermind, I thought you were talking about the 3rd gen TL in your comment poisx7. Sorry about that...

 

I had the chance to drive an 05 TL 5AT for 3 days to answer my own question. I got it as a rental when i dropped off my car at the dealer. The new TL feels quicker off the line at low rpms, but i think the CL-S would inch away at freeway speeds. I cant really tell the difference that well because im used to driving my car with intake and headers on.
I really liked the new TL. Handling got a lot better and yet the ride is still soft and comfy. The car feels smooth when accelerating and has good brakes. Interior improved and has more details...