dom

Colin, do you plan on running these points past customers when they balk at the price of the V6? I hope you don't expect them to give a damn if you do. But I'd imagine you've been in the business long enough to know not to bother.

Viper98912

Colin where are you getting Anna, Michigan? I believe it's actually Anna, Ohio buddy

Also, Acura has updated their website now to show the "2010" TSX. Basically, all they did was change the 09 to 10 and change the webpages around. Everything is still identical, not a single change, not even the pictures. The V6 is also not listed just yet.

ESHBG

GM failed because of crappy business practices and a shoddy product, not because of cash back incentives. Going one step further, IMO the cash back incentives are what helped to keep them around for so long and probably helped them limp the product along these last few months and squeeze out every last drop of blood.

I don't think Acura needs to go crazy w/ cash back incentives and I can agree that there would need to be limits, but...why not move product and help to further define the trims? I'd be open to any suggestions with this but again, currently I think that the V6 TSX pricing is just not a wise move right now.

*Not to mention that the price of gas is quickly shooting up again. I think we could see a return to hysteria even at $3.50/gallon...people got used to the much lower prices and the economy is still churning very slowly, so who's going to pay big $ for a V6 that doesn't offer much more than its I4 counterpart or its much bigger cousin?

Viper98912

Cash back is what kills resale values. So as Honda/Acura pride themselves on the industry's best resale values to sell their cars, cash back would be a big no no.

It's even posted on the main page of Acura's website now.

Colin

Yup, brain fart....

Colin

Actually, it depends. This may come as a surprise to you, but every customer balks at every price. Shocking I know! (true insider info here). If someone insists on knowing why, it "is what it is", I'd probably share my thoughts, but unless raised, I doubt it's worth the time to justify. Bottom line: they'll know the price before they come in. If they objected that violently, they wouldn't come down.

Colin

There are a number of factors, but their heavy reliance on cash back, employee pricing, 0 interest financing etc, are all "crappy business practices" so I agree with you there. But, I disagree that incentives should be a 'part' of the business plan.
I don't think that Honda in Japan see it that way. I think they seem to be saying that "if we have to 'pay' people to buy our cars because we have too much, we'll just make less" IMO, its a gutsy stance and only time will tell if trading volume for profitability is wise, but I suspect it is.

Who indeed. I think that Acura would be happy with a similar ratio of I4 to V6 as Lexus gets with the IS250 and 350. Is there not a similar price gap between these two?

SSFTSX

IS350 fuel economy is not worse than IS250 in real life tests. and its performance is far superior. 5speed auto. i dont believe it can match IS350 direct ignition performance. (under 5.4 sec)
Those who want to pay penalty for fuel economy will want to buy real performance improvement not nose heavy car. otherwise 4 cylinder is much cheaper to buy, run and own. no timing belt issue. and for real performance there is 335I/G37/IS350.
TSX was much better with $40K diesel with full Euro Specification like CMBS/ACC/LKAS. and that point it would be competing against $40K HS250 with all its electronics. I believe diesel can match 34 mpg combined economic of HS250h and beat it in performance.

TSX69

3.5-liter, VTEC® V-6 engine, producing 280 horsepower and 254 lb-ft of torque
Sequential SportShift 5-speed automatic transmission (Although similar in design to the transmission available with the 4-cylinder engine, the transmission mated to the V-6 engine is more robust to handle the substantial increase in horsepower and uses different gear ratios to take advantage of the V-6’s abundant torque.)
Sport-tuned exhaust system with dual outlet tips
Upgraded charging system with a heavy-duty battery
Split five-spoke, 18 X 8-inch diameter aluminum wheels
Michelin Pilot P235/45R18 all-season tires
Exclusive suspension tuning with special rate front springs and recalibrated dampers
Expanded use of Electronic Control Mount (ECM) system to control Noise, Vibration, and Harshness (NVH)
Active Sound Control (ASC) noise cancellation system
Upgraded braking system (Special rear brake pads are used that deliver improved stopping power. In addition, the V-6 model makes use of a larger brake master cylinder, a revised pedal ratio, and a new brake booster to deliver more performance-minded braking feel.)
Revised front fascia opening for improved engine cooling
Strut system for easy hood opening
V-6 emblem on rear trunk lid
Easier-to-read Navigation screen with reduced glare compared to the 2009 TSX (Technology Package—also on I-4 model)

dom

True. But I'd still like to see you try.

dom

$5,540 suddenly doesn't seem so unreasonable. Where do I sign?!

CraigMacDTA

Anybody heard any details on Canadian prices? I figured the Premium Package would come in at about $39000 and Tech Package at $42,500.

In regards to the $5500 increase...the general public interested in this car won't have a problem with it as those who are actually interested in this car will find that anything LOWER in price than the TL is a fair price, given the looks of the TL.

Type-S RPh

Just got my daily e-mail from Autoweek and it had a test drive of the V6. Just a short review. Acura listed the 0-60 time as a "conservative" 7.0 seconds. Autoweek seems to agree that it is conservative but they didn't test it. Other than that it seems like the suspension is still a bit soft but they liked the extra power.

dom

I'm very curious. The 4 cylinder Tech AT comes in $40,300. If we use the US model and add $2,400 to the base V6 compared to a 4 cylinder Tech we're at $42,700 for a base V6 and $45.7 for a Tech V6. I can't see prices being that high considering a TL with tech is $43.5. I hope your numbers are right.

dom

Link to Autoweek review

http://www.autoweek.com/article/2009...IEWS/906059995

dom

Can we finally put the talk of a 'sports tuned suspension' to rest.

Type-S RPh

Yeah really! I wish they would make an a-spec suspension for the 2nd gen!

JeffS

Where did the sports tuned suspension/sports package nonsense ever come from anyway? Acura never mentioned it and the suspension and tire changes are only to deal with the added weight and power verses increased handling.

CraigMacDTA

I hope so too! It would be sales suicide, especially since the TL's Tech Package gives you SO much more.

dom

It came from a few posters from both this board and others that took re-tuned suspension to mean sport suspension. To be honest when Acura first announced the V6 a few months ago I initially presumed the same.

JD23

Unfortunately, the TSX V6 is the same weight as the FWD TL, so expect nearly identical performance.

SSFTSX

Nope. I am expecting TSX V6 to perform significantly better in quarter mile and speeds above 100mph

JD23

I'm going to assume you're going to say it's because the TSX has better aerodynamics. With the same engine, transmission and weight, I think any difference is going to be negligible. Even if the TSX is faster above 100, will it make a difference to 95% of the potential customers?

dom

You also never thought a V6 was a possibility and never thought it would offer 18" wheels so what you think doesn't really matter.

SSFTSX

Those wheels are already on EuroAccord. and V6 it is not good idea for such heavy car. fuel economy and price combination is not right.

SSFTSX

It will be quite a difference. I am expecting 10 second difference from 0-120mph.

JD23

In the recent C&D comparison test, the TL SH-AWD ran from 0 to 120 in 29 sec, while the G37, which was the fastest car in the comparison, ran 0 to 120 in 19.6 sec with a MT. You seriously expect the V6 TSX to be as fast as a MT equipped G37 from 0-120?

Breako

Hey, he's entitled to his opinions too, Mr. moderator.

Colin

Well..........Hmmmmmmmmm............I guess as long as he doesn't state opinions as fact.

Breako

True. That distinction, which seems to be lost on some members of this forum, is pretty important.

Colin

Just to be fair, it is sometimes lost on SSFTSX as well.

dom

Go back and read through his posts and then comment about his opinion.

But as out to left field as he is, he should be commended for not biting back after all the harassment he's taken.

dom

SSFTSX

I am expecting number pretty close to 20 second mark for 120mph. At those speeds transmission does not that much matter.
C&D can manage it as they manage 6.7 sec for 0-60 mph for 2G TSX vs 7.5 second for 1G TSX.

Even the older version which is less aerodynamic has 33 second to 120mph.
2G TSX can reach 120mph under 30 second for 4 cylinder as there is 1.2 second difference at 100mph according to Road&Track.


http://www..com/forums/canada-east/3...r-2-print.html
TSX (C&D 10/04)
0-60mph: 7.5s
0-100mph: 19.9s
0-120mph: 33.7s
1/4-mile: 15.7s@90mph
Roadholding, 300-ft skidpad: 0.83g
Top Speed: 136mph

dom

Ya, your reasoning doesn't make any sense.

The facts are in plain site. The TL with the same engine, tranny and similar weight does it it 29. How you come up with 20 is a mystery only you will ever have the answer for.

Must be the 18" wheels.

SSFTSX

Look at this result. Heavier and less bhp, larger frontal area (72.5 inch width) 2G TSX is beating 1 G TSX by 1.1 second at 100mph mark. despite consuming 7.5 sec from 0-60mph.
I bet C&D can bring 0-100mph times under 18 seconds as they manage 0-60 in 6.7 second for 4 cylinder. that will be atleast 2 second difference for 100mph from 1G TSX. and that gap widens much higher at higher speeds.

http://www.roadandtrack.com/article....rticle_id=6833

Engine, transmission
2.4-liter I-4; 6-sp manual
Horsepower, bhp @ rpm
201 @ 7000
Torque, lb-ft @ rpm
172 @ 4400
0–60 mph
7.5 sec
0–100 mph
18.8 sec

dom

Using those figures, lets presume the 2nd gen V6 can get to 100 in 17 seconds. You think it will take 3 to 4 seconds to get to 120?

G37 in the first column, 335 in the second

0-100 13.8 12.2
0-110 16.6 15.3
0-120 20.2 18.2

Top Gear

100-120 12.8 8.3

Again, it takes the 328HP G 19.6 seconds with roughly the same weight. Why you're choosing to argue this point

JD23

It also needs to be noted that the C&D 2G TSX test was conducted on a 6MT equipped car and the V6 will only be available with AT, reducing the performance gain.

SSFTSX

Why would it take 17 seconds to reach 100mph? when R&T manage 18.8 from 7.5 second 0-60mph. I am sure they can manage 0-60 at under 6 second mark from V6.
think harder. TSX is alot more aerodynamic than BMW 335/G37. even if it reaches 0-100mph in 15 second. it will be pretty close to 20 second mark at 120mph. and at 0-130mph it will be beating 335/G37.

dom

Like talking to a dumb wall. We'll pick this up when some numbers come in.