Nashua_Night_Hawk

Yeah sure, the 6-speed is more or less in the works, what about such engine, 3.5L with 9,000 rpm with 330-350HP and say AWD for the sake of it. Can we say we have a real M3 competitor

ruvz

Keep dreaming buddy!

Mike

Acura NEEDS at least one awd car in their line up if they want to keep pace w/other automotive manafacturers.

thholr

if anything gets AWD it will be the TL . The volume of the CL is way too low to warrant it . Maybe if the TL gets it they will throw it on the CL too. but you never know

Rymnrsn

I remember reading Motor Trend about 2 years ago when Acura was still working on the MDX about how much money Acura invested in the AWD system. The article stated that the rumor was that they would end up using the same AWD system across multiple platforms to help recoupe the cost.

Now we will just have to wait and see.

Mike

Attn Acura, if you brought an AWD, 6 speed manual transmission CLS to the market tomorrow I would absolutely positively buy one. Btw, adding more torque would be a huge plus too.

EricL

But, then again, how much would you pay for it?

Fabvsix

I am drooling ! MDX all wheel drive R&D effort makes sense and makes me drool..........

amir was here

i am afraid to say it, but i think if the 6-speed doesnt give the CL a boost in sales, that the CL will be gone...

i never see this car, ever, how can acura make money on it???? I dont know why more peole dont buy the car...its really messed up..

Southpaw

[QUOTE]Originally posted by amirsafdari:
<STRONG>i am afraid to say it, but i think if the 6-speed doesnt give the CL a boost in sales, that the CL will be gone...

i never see this car, ever, how can acura make money on it???? I dont know why more peole dont buy the car...its really messed up..</STRONG>[/QUOTEmy

my parents went to florida and saw one cls i dont know if thats good or bad

mdaniel

Maybe it would sell better if they called it a TL Coupe.

Mike

Whatever they're asking

tel1sps

They would have to do something about the weight of the car....... It would be close to 4000pds!!!

ZodiakTL

i dunno... around NYC i see almost as many cl's as tl's, and i have yet to drive without seeing either one or the other in the last several months. i think it all depends on ur geographic location. acura will not get rid of the CL cause they can always reduce the volume for it, as its built on same platform as TL, so i dont think its an issue. if sales are really bad, they'll just make less of them. and i dont think a more powerful CL/TL will come out for a while. right now we are the most powerful in our class. when new infiniti comes out, they will be same 260hp. i dont think thats reason enough to bump us up, but i'm sure acura could. it took nissan 3.5 liters to achieve what honda did with 3.2, so think what the next bump to 3.5 would mean

Mercury

I agree...being in NY and NJ I see 3 or 4 a day on the roads! I think the CL will be around for a while. The RSX is NOT Luxury and they need something to keep the 26-30 ppl happy otherwise we're off to BMW and Benz. No way I'm driving an IS300!

e1828

I heard that the RSX will soon be a part of the Honda lineup, S2000 production will stop after next year, and maybe an Accord convertible to compete with the Solara convert.. I heard these all from a finance manager at a Honda dealership.. oh of course the Honda variant of the MDX as well

e1828

I see at least 3-4 CL-S's here in the San Francisco bay everyday.. and on the weekends over 5 a day on the highways.. ps to add to the previous post.. no more Prelude as I assume everyone already knows

SSMAN

What is it with you guys and the desire to turn high RPM? High RPM doesn't make a car quicker. The increased load only requires stronger (more expensive) parts, and decreases longevity and reliability. I would much prefer to see an engine with a broad torque curve, with peak torque in the cruising RPM range.

fast_daddy_car

You really should see someone to help you stop looking at yourself in the mirror while you drive

Zapata

if it did have it, we'd have the new

NSX

typeR

thats why i wonder how a direct engine swap out of the mdx would fair???240hp...thats only 20 less but 245 torque thats 12 more you think it be a noticible difference...???

phil2

SOUNDS LIKE A WET DREAM TO ME!

SSMAN

The MDX, CL-S, and TL-S use the same cylinder block and cylinder head castings. The difference in the shortblock between the MDX and CL/TL is the rotating assembly (crank, rods, and pistons). The difference in the cylinder head assemblies is the camshaft profile. You can swap your Type-S heads onto the MDX shortblock and get the best of both worlds.....broad torque band (increases across the full range) and higher peak torque and hp #'s.

gmilian

not for 30,000 dollars.

Jake

AFAIK, High RPM CAN make a car quicker assuming the torque curve doesn't drop off. Remember tha Horsepower is derived in a calculation of torque and RPM. The higher the RPM, the higher the possible horsepower.

[ 08-09-2001: Message edited by: Jake ]

EricL

I totaly understand the short block swap -- I'm wondering if the PGM-F1 would work without any tweaks...

SSMAN, do you have an opinion on this? (The syncivic 3.5 gets a V-AFC added and dyno tuned to "compensate" for the added CCs)

typeR

ya and do you think that our head would supply enough air???and an interestin side note that i wasnt aware of the mdx does also share the same hemholtz prinicple two stage intake plenum...

SSMAN

Jake - There is absolutely no relationship between how quick a car is and the RPM capability of the engine. If your theory was true, somebody should contact Jim Butler and Mike Murillo. Jim runs 7.50's at nearly 200mph in a 1965 Pontiac GTO that shifts at 6500rpm, and Mike pilots a S/O Mustang that runs in the high 7's (also under 7000rpm). Both of these gentlemen should be advised that the RSX and S2000 will kill them by RPM.

EricL - The capability of the stock ECU would be stretched at 3.5 liters with other bolt-on modifications (ported heads, headers, exhaust, CAI). There is certainly performance to be gained through minor tweaks, but you won't hurt anything in stock form.

You can coax the ECU into submission by increasing the fuel pressure delivered to the rail/injectors.

The biggest performance gain to be unlocked in the ECU isn't fuel delivery....it's the timing map. The timing map was created to please a broad customer demographic. This translates to sacrifice for the performance enthusiast (keep grandma's teeth in her head when the trans shifts, and give her enough fuel efficiency to keep her from whining).

TypeR - The same cylinder head casting is used on CL-P, CL-S, TL-P, TL-S, and MDX. This means each vehicle shares the same intake/exhaust port volume and flow, same combustion chamber size, and the same valve sizes. The only difference in cylinder head assemblies is the camshaft profile. Since the Type-S has the most aggressive camshaft of the bunch, the heads would be very well suited to the 3.5 liter engine.

typeR

see this is the part where my stupidity shows....you say these cars share the same head...does the head contain the dual stage intake runners???cause i thought that was exclusive to the type S then i learned the MDX had it too....and would putting our head on the MDX short block maintain the MDX"S 10.0 compression or would it possible be altered and...if not and some benefits could come from increased compression at this point would we be better suited to shave the head?performance head gasket ?or find some suitable domed pistons????

SSMAN

It's not stupidity at all. We all learn by asking

The intake design that you're talking about refers to the Type-S dual plenum area in the upper portion of the intake manifold, not the cylinder head. Since the head casting is the same on both engines, the MDX shortblock with Type-S heads will yield a 10.0:1 compression ratio. You can increase compression with custom pistons, but they will set you back $600. In my opinion it's not worth the investment for 1/2 point in compression. Each full point represents roughly a 1.5% power increase (up to 12.0:1). Beyond that point you'll find diminishing returns due to cylinder pressure and the subsequent increase in combustion temperature.

EricL

So, SSMAN, are you currently doing the 3.5 short block (bottom end) splice to the top end.

And is there anyway for a tech inspection (smog inspection) to check that there is a different bottom end on the car.

Please check your profile -- I left you a private message (your e-mail is blocked and so is mine) so I could leave you some other info...

[ 08-10-2001: Message edited by: EricL ]

typeR

so...since we would see gains in hp and in torque because of the more aggressive cam profile of the type S than truly the furture of our car very well could /should be 3.5 more torque ....our computer would still wanna take this setup to 6900 redline at wot for shifts do you see any negatives with that being this new setup would have a longer stroke???


you're currently doing this to your car????3.5???

SSMAN

I have built a few 3.5's for friends and local enthusiasts. I have experience with both methods (rotating assembly installation & MDX short block). I may build one for my car some day, but I have a few other projects that are dominating my free time.

<img src=http://images.andale.com/f2/126/125/6051729/997325776912_dyno.jpg>

Since the 3.2 and 3.5 blocks are the same, there is no way to distinguish displacement by appearance. The original block is stamped with the vehicle serial #, and the MDX replacement will be blank. A replacement 3.2 is also blank, so I don't see this as a problem. State inspection and emissions facility employees typically aren't known as the mental pillars of society

autoxCLS

SSMAN, I can truly say that we are indeed lucky to have you on the board. You know your shit. Hope you hang around.

macon

Sounds good to me.