2010 TSX - V6 engine confirmed
12-30-2008, 02:48 PM
#281
Senior Moderator
Ban me if wanna, BUT that wasn't called for, IMHO! You sure you've read all of SSFTSX's post? While he shouldn't be banned, most of what says just seems a little too arrogant, to me!
Why didn't you ban Colin?(oh, I forgot, he's an Acura salesman)
You and LUVMYTSX came down a little too harsh on H1K1F1, IMO. Continue the ARROGANCE!
Why didn't you ban Colin?(oh, I forgot, he's an Acura salesman)
You and LUVMYTSX came down a little too harsh on H1K1F1, IMO. Continue the ARROGANCE!
12-30-2008, 02:53 PM
#283
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2007
Age: 45
Posts: 2,573
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think that guy should be banned but I think he fits the technical definition of a troll according to wikipedia "An Internet troll, or simply troll in Internet slang, is someone who posts controversial, inflammatory, irrelevant or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum or chat room, with the intention of provoking other users into an emotional response or to generally disrupt normal on-topic discussion." I shouldn't have replied to him. I got sucked into his little game.
12-30-2008, 03:06 PM
#284
Senior Moderator
I don't think that guy should be banned but I think he fits the technical definition of a troll according to wikipedia "An Internet troll, or simply troll in Internet slang, is someone who posts controversial, inflammatory, irrelevant or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum or chat room, with the intention of provoking other users into an emotional response or to generally disrupt normal on-topic discussion." I shouldn't have replied to him. I got sucked into his little game.
12-30-2008, 03:33 PM
#285
Three Wheelin'
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Somewhere out there
Age: 47
Posts: 1,270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What makes VCM for "old people"? The VCM V6 Accord is faster than the 2.0T Passat.
12-30-2008, 04:14 PM
#287
My only car is a Bus
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Republik of Kalifornia
Posts: 3,254
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
The guy is like a distortion field. Personal attacks are wrong but saying things like Honda is finished or Acura is dead or always bringing up Audi with suspect facts doesn't create a meaningful discussion.
12-30-2008, 04:16 PM
#288
Acura was rescued by MDX (family van).
This is 2007 when China booming. what will happen in 2009? or do u think Honda corporate strategy does not take into account Market?
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m...3/ai_n25300369
Acura cars were first introduced to China in September 2006 and its RL and TL versions did not meet their sales goal there as of the end of May 2007.
Acura cars were first introduced to China in September 2006 and its RL and TL versions did not meet their sales goal there as of the end of May 2007.
What makes VCM for "old people"? The VCM V6 Accord is faster than the 2.0T Passat.
Look at the actual results not EPA ratings. Turbo has there own enjoyment.
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...vw_passat.html
Even in a class filled with well-fortified challengers from the U.S., Japan, and South Korea, Volkswagen's Passat Turbo stands out.
you're seeking a four-cylinder, four-door "driver's car," look no further. With the most potent engine in its class, the Passat leaves rivals gasping in its exhaust fumes. Zero to 60 mph takes just 6.7 sec with the available six-speed automatic transmission (a $1075 option). Further, the Passat trips the quarter-mile lights in just 15 sec flat. "The 2.0L turbo is so lovely," says Kiino. "Gobs of torque down low, very smooth, plus good mileage." (The Turbo returns 19 mpg city/28 mpg highway with the automatic.)
The first time you bend the Passat into a corner, you'll know its virtues don't end with its mighty mill. Steering feel is smooth and linear, and the suspension returns plenty of handling prowess (0.83 g) with a ride that never turns harsh. Keep an eye on the speedo: The Passat Turbo does "swift" like Howard Stern does shock. You might not even notice your true pace until those blue lights appear in your rearview mirror.
Even in a class filled with well-fortified challengers from the U.S., Japan, and South Korea, Volkswagen's Passat Turbo stands out.
you're seeking a four-cylinder, four-door "driver's car," look no further. With the most potent engine in its class, the Passat leaves rivals gasping in its exhaust fumes. Zero to 60 mph takes just 6.7 sec with the available six-speed automatic transmission (a $1075 option). Further, the Passat trips the quarter-mile lights in just 15 sec flat. "The 2.0L turbo is so lovely," says Kiino. "Gobs of torque down low, very smooth, plus good mileage." (The Turbo returns 19 mpg city/28 mpg highway with the automatic.)
The first time you bend the Passat into a corner, you'll know its virtues don't end with its mighty mill. Steering feel is smooth and linear, and the suspension returns plenty of handling prowess (0.83 g) with a ride that never turns harsh. Keep an eye on the speedo: The Passat Turbo does "swift" like Howard Stern does shock. You might not even notice your true pace until those blue lights appear in your rearview mirror.
12-30-2008, 04:42 PM
#289
His arguments are tangential....we went from discussing a V6 with VCM in the TSX to a turbo 4's effect on honda's global presence. In this last post, he gave more info than I cared to read about the Passat. Might as well start discussing the automotive bailout and how it affects the V6 w/ VCM.
Maybe he has a right to do this (and now feels empowered to do so), but the arguments are the acurazine equivalent of a filibuster. He might as well be copying and pasting the phone book. In fact his style is starting to remind of Caddy in P&R.
JMHO, I'll try to be a sport and ignore this thread. Thanks mods, for at least being present.
Maybe he has a right to do this (and now feels empowered to do so), but the arguments are the acurazine equivalent of a filibuster. He might as well be copying and pasting the phone book. In fact his style is starting to remind of Caddy in P&R.
JMHO, I'll try to be a sport and ignore this thread. Thanks mods, for at least being present.
12-30-2008, 05:53 PM
#290
http://www.vtec.net/news/news-item?news_item_id=797648
12-30-2008, 06:16 PM
#291
Instructor
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The decision to go with a V-6 was made a long time ago, it is possible they might change their direction as they have changed a lot of things recently. For example, they have canceled the diesel for the US:
http://www.vtec.net/news/news-item?news_item_id=797648
http://www.vtec.net/news/news-item?news_item_id=797648
Somehow I missed the cancellation of the diesel, thanks for advising. I still hold to the belief that times are changing, the days of torque in larger discplacement engines will go by the wayside. We have to accept it and move on. Look for either dual turbo/supercharging, or electric assist for better zero start launches in the future. Fuel economy, be it a Chevy or a Porshe, have to be met. . . period.
My biggest fear is the probable demise of the manual transimission because of the fuel regulations. Already the TSX has better fuel economy with a 5 speed auto (the TSX is not unique in this comparison either). Just think what will happen with dual clutch 6 or 7 speed auto's or if the DVT durablity issues gets worked out. What will us 'purist' have??? To be happy with paddle shifters??? That would be like eating at McDonalds, it gets the job done, but does not leave you satisfied.
12-30-2008, 06:34 PM
#292
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2007
Age: 45
Posts: 2,573
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think torque can be treated as a fad. Torque is a fun, and as long as they're selling it a lot of people will be buying it. One of the top reasons I upgraded to a 2G TSX over a used TL-S was because the 2G TSX has a satisfying torque improvement over the 1G that helps make up for the difference.
I'm not exactly sure why the auto is more fuel efficient than the manual because it's using a torque converter after all which is inherently less efficient than a direct connection. I've noticed the 5AT deliberately has more mechanical advantage in it's overdrive drive than the 6MT in 6th gear. I have absolutely no idea why Honda did that.
I have to admit I'm worried the DSG will make clutches and sticks a thing of the past for luxury makes. Even if you could choose between them you'd be shooting yourself in the foot performance wise to choose a traditional manual over DSG. That would be a bitter choice to make.
I'm not exactly sure why the auto is more fuel efficient than the manual because it's using a torque converter after all which is inherently less efficient than a direct connection. I've noticed the 5AT deliberately has more mechanical advantage in it's overdrive drive than the 6MT in 6th gear. I have absolutely no idea why Honda did that.
I have to admit I'm worried the DSG will make clutches and sticks a thing of the past for luxury makes. Even if you could choose between them you'd be shooting yourself in the foot performance wise to choose a traditional manual over DSG. That would be a bitter choice to make.
at the turns and twists.
12-30-2008, 06:53 PM
#294
5th Gear
Join Date: Dec 2008
Age: 34
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Complete bullshit. TSX won't get a V6 engine, not in today's economy. Think about this logically okay? In today's economy barely anyone buy cars, therefore expensive cars are out of the question and gas killers. If Acura gives TSX a V6 that makes the price go up for the TSX and the MPG would woresten.
Common sense here. Another point why would Acura already make a new model of the TSX when they just released a new model for the 09. They did already a lot this year. They remodeled all there cars, and within a year they are going to remake the TSX again? Wouldn't this piss of 09 TSX buyers? Because they just bought a 09 TSX (new) but in a year or less they make a V6 TSX? Bull shit. Dude you have no idea how much people would be piss off of that.
Acura rumored of a Turbo Disael for the Inline4 Sedan. Not a V6. Acura TSX does fine without a V6 on the streets and the tracks. RoadandTrack, autos, and other sites on the web clearly did road tests on the TSX and its faster than Audi 2.0T and the Lexus IS250. I personally do races for fun, the last week I raced my TSX vs my friends IS250 both stock. And AUTO cause I got the TSX late 08 when the 09 is already coming out. I won, dead stop. waited for green light. A TSX with inline4 205HP beat a IS250 V6 with 204HP. I don't see why a TSX would need a V6 do you? The TSX is clearly faster, people say its slow cause of the #'s on the papers, its actually pretty fast car if you drive it.
TSX gives you everything bluetooth/Navi for just a bit under 30K and IS250 gives you everything for 40K and nothing for about 33-34K. Rip off. IS250 is slower also. The TSX is not gonna get more buyers if Acura V6 it and jump the price. I read some posts saying V6 TSX might range to 35K+. If thats true, I rather buy a IS350. Same price but faster.
Clearly this thread is fake, cause if source = proof. He has no proof. Hes just some idiot.
Common sense here. Another point why would Acura already make a new model of the TSX when they just released a new model for the 09. They did already a lot this year. They remodeled all there cars, and within a year they are going to remake the TSX again? Wouldn't this piss of 09 TSX buyers? Because they just bought a 09 TSX (new) but in a year or less they make a V6 TSX? Bull shit. Dude you have no idea how much people would be piss off of that.
Acura rumored of a Turbo Disael for the Inline4 Sedan. Not a V6. Acura TSX does fine without a V6 on the streets and the tracks. RoadandTrack, autos, and other sites on the web clearly did road tests on the TSX and its faster than Audi 2.0T and the Lexus IS250. I personally do races for fun, the last week I raced my TSX vs my friends IS250 both stock. And AUTO cause I got the TSX late 08 when the 09 is already coming out. I won, dead stop. waited for green light. A TSX with inline4 205HP beat a IS250 V6 with 204HP. I don't see why a TSX would need a V6 do you? The TSX is clearly faster, people say its slow cause of the #'s on the papers, its actually pretty fast car if you drive it.
TSX gives you everything bluetooth/Navi for just a bit under 30K and IS250 gives you everything for 40K and nothing for about 33-34K. Rip off. IS250 is slower also. The TSX is not gonna get more buyers if Acura V6 it and jump the price. I read some posts saying V6 TSX might range to 35K+. If thats true, I rather buy a IS350. Same price but faster.
Clearly this thread is fake, cause if source = proof. He has no proof. Hes just some idiot.
12-30-2008, 07:03 PM
#295
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2007
Age: 45
Posts: 2,573
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Complete bullshit. TSX won't get a V6 engine, not in today's economy. Think about this logically okay? In today's economy barely anyone buy cars, therefore expensive cars are out of the question and gas killers. If Acura gives TSX a V6 that makes the price go up for the TSX and the MPG would woresten.
Common sense here. Another point why would Acura already make a new model of the TSX when they just released a new model for the 09. They did already a lot this year. They remodeled all there cars, and within a year they are going to remake the TSX again? Wouldn't this piss of 09 TSX buyers? Because they just bought a 09 TSX (new) but in a year or less they make a V6 TSX? Bull shit. Dude you have no idea how much people would be piss off of that.
Acura rumored of a Turbo Disael for the Inline4 Sedan. Not a V6. Acura TSX does fine without a V6 on the streets and the tracks. RoadandTrack, autos, and other sites on the web clearly did road tests on the TSX and its faster than Audi 2.0T and the Lexus IS250. I personally do races for fun, the last week I raced my TSX vs my friends IS250 both stock. And AUTO cause I got the TSX late 08 when the 09 is already coming out. I won, dead stop. waited for green light. A TSX with inline4 205HP beat a IS250 V6 with 204HP. I don't see why a TSX would need a V6 do you? The TSX is clearly faster, people say its slow cause of the #'s on the papers, its actually pretty fast car if you drive it.
TSX gives you everything bluetooth/Navi for just a bit under 30K and IS250 gives you everything for 40K and nothing for about 33-34K. Rip off. IS250 is slower also. The TSX is not gonna get more buyers if Acura V6 it and jump the price. I read some posts saying V6 TSX might range to 35K+. If thats true, I rather buy a IS350. Same price but faster.
Clearly this thread is fake, cause if source = proof. He has no proof. Hes just some idiot.
Common sense here. Another point why would Acura already make a new model of the TSX when they just released a new model for the 09. They did already a lot this year. They remodeled all there cars, and within a year they are going to remake the TSX again? Wouldn't this piss of 09 TSX buyers? Because they just bought a 09 TSX (new) but in a year or less they make a V6 TSX? Bull shit. Dude you have no idea how much people would be piss off of that.
Acura rumored of a Turbo Disael for the Inline4 Sedan. Not a V6. Acura TSX does fine without a V6 on the streets and the tracks. RoadandTrack, autos, and other sites on the web clearly did road tests on the TSX and its faster than Audi 2.0T and the Lexus IS250. I personally do races for fun, the last week I raced my TSX vs my friends IS250 both stock. And AUTO cause I got the TSX late 08 when the 09 is already coming out. I won, dead stop. waited for green light. A TSX with inline4 205HP beat a IS250 V6 with 204HP. I don't see why a TSX would need a V6 do you? The TSX is clearly faster, people say its slow cause of the #'s on the papers, its actually pretty fast car if you drive it.
TSX gives you everything bluetooth/Navi for just a bit under 30K and IS250 gives you everything for 40K and nothing for about 33-34K. Rip off. IS250 is slower also. The TSX is not gonna get more buyers if Acura V6 it and jump the price. I read some posts saying V6 TSX might range to 35K+. If thats true, I rather buy a IS350. Same price but faster.
Clearly this thread is fake, cause if source = proof. He has no proof. Hes just some idiot.
1) Regarding gas and cost, poor people don't buy TSXs. The bad economy will hurt some more than others.
2) A larger engine option wouldn't constitute a full model redesign.
3) Talk to Apple about pissing off existing customers. Last I checked they were doing OK.
4) who would brag about beating a stock IS 250 in the first place?
5) A V6 TSX would likely be cheaper than an IS350 and there's no MT offered with that model
Last edited by wackura; 12-30-2008 at 07:06 PM.
12-30-2008, 07:05 PM
#296
5th Gear
Join Date: Dec 2008
Age: 34
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If Acura is gonna do something like Base, Navi, V6 Base, V6 Navi, V6 Navi SH-AWD. They gonna lose money, thats too much just for the TSX. Lets say they do this. Right now the Base TSX 09 is 29K. Navi TSX 32K. So V6 Base lets say 34K. V6 Navi 36K. V6 NAVI SH-AWD 38-40K. The TSX WILL NOT GET THIS EXPENSIVE. IF they do this, they are just making the TSX another TL. WHICH THEY WON'T DO. TAKE YOUR RUMOR AND SHOVE IT UP UR ASS. YOU IDIOT. A V6 BASE IS 34K RIGHT? JUST A GUESS.
To be fair and let me prove my point. a V6 Base TSX will probably cost 34K. Because the Inline4 TSX Navi is 32K. A V6 trim is logically higher if they are making a V6 TSX. 2K is a fair price up. Thread start said it will have 240HP V6. Okay.... For 34K. The TL Base model is V6 280HP for 34K also. Why the fuck would Acura make the TSX the same price as the TL but the TL has more HP. HUH? Don't say the V6 TSX will be less than 34K because it won't be. it cant be cheaper than a inline4 navi model cause that don't make sense.
Clearly Logic just proved this thread starter is dip shit that needs to gtfo.
I didn't say full redesign.
I didn't brag using it as proof tsx does fine w/o a V6.
Also why would the TSX V6 won't be at least 34K+? when the Inline 4 base navi is 32K. how you gonna tell me a V6 model is cheaper than a base navi.
To be fair and let me prove my point. a V6 Base TSX will probably cost 34K. Because the Inline4 TSX Navi is 32K. A V6 trim is logically higher if they are making a V6 TSX. 2K is a fair price up. Thread start said it will have 240HP V6. Okay.... For 34K. The TL Base model is V6 280HP for 34K also. Why the fuck would Acura make the TSX the same price as the TL but the TL has more HP. HUH? Don't say the V6 TSX will be less than 34K because it won't be. it cant be cheaper than a inline4 navi model cause that don't make sense.
Clearly Logic just proved this thread starter is dip shit that needs to gtfo.
I didn't say full redesign.
I didn't brag using it as proof tsx does fine w/o a V6.
Also why would the TSX V6 won't be at least 34K+? when the Inline 4 base navi is 32K. how you gonna tell me a V6 model is cheaper than a base navi.
12-30-2008, 07:09 PM
#297
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2007
Age: 45
Posts: 2,573
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If Acura is gonna do something like Base, Navi, V6 Base, V6 Navi, V6 Navi SH-AWD. They gonna lose money, thats too much just for the TSX. Lets say they do this. Right now the Base TSX 09 is 29K. Navi TSX 32K. So V6 Base lets say 34K. V6 Navi 36K. V6 NAVI SH-AWD 38-40K. The TSX WILL NOT GET THIS EXPENSIVE. IF they do this, they are just making the TSX another TL. WHICH THEY WON'T DO. TAKE YOUR RUMOR AND SHOVE IT UP UR ASS. YOU IDIOT. A V6 BASE IS 34K RIGHT? JUST A GUESS.
To be fair and let me prove my point. a V6 Base TSX will probably cost 34K. Because the Inline4 TSX Navi is 32K. A V6 trim is logically higher if they are making a V6 TSX. 2K is a fair price up. Thread start said it will have 240HP V6. Okay.... For 34K. The TL Base model is V6 280HP for 34K also. Why the fuck would Acura make the TSX the same price as the TL but the TL has more HP. HUH? Don't say the V6 TSX will be less than 34K because it won't be. it cant be cheaper than a inline4 navi model cause that don't make sense.
Clearly Logic just proved this thread starter is dip shit that needs to gtfo.
I didn't say full redesign.
I didn't brag using it as proof tsx does fine w/o a V6.
Also why would the TSX V6 won't be at least 34K+? when the Inline 4 base navi is 32K. how you gonna tell me a V6 model is cheaper than a base navi.
To be fair and let me prove my point. a V6 Base TSX will probably cost 34K. Because the Inline4 TSX Navi is 32K. A V6 trim is logically higher if they are making a V6 TSX. 2K is a fair price up. Thread start said it will have 240HP V6. Okay.... For 34K. The TL Base model is V6 280HP for 34K also. Why the fuck would Acura make the TSX the same price as the TL but the TL has more HP. HUH? Don't say the V6 TSX will be less than 34K because it won't be. it cant be cheaper than a inline4 navi model cause that don't make sense.
Clearly Logic just proved this thread starter is dip shit that needs to gtfo.
I didn't say full redesign.
I didn't brag using it as proof tsx does fine w/o a V6.
Also why would the TSX V6 won't be at least 34K+? when the Inline 4 base navi is 32K. how you gonna tell me a V6 model is cheaper than a base navi.
12-30-2008, 07:12 PM
#299
5th Gear
Join Date: Dec 2008
Age: 34
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
09 TSX
Base : 29K
Navi: 32K
Should not the V6 model cost more than the 09 TSX Navi? To make more sense cause its a higher trim level. Making at least 33-34K would be fair. But honestly.... that just pushes it near the TL price and TL has 280HP. Why would you pay almost the same price for a lower level car, and less power? The TSX is made with Inline4 for a reason. So people can step up to a TL for a V6 if they want a V6. TL is 34K start. Seems fair enough for a V6 Acura. V6 280HP for 34K seems fair for a TL. But a V6 TSX with 240 HP and for 34K? Acura trying to kill themselves?
Because... A V6 would clearly be a higher trim than a navi inline 4 trim? 2K more than the Navi trim.
It can't be 32K cause the V6 Trim will probably be higher than navi inline4 trim.
Base : 29K
Navi: 32K
Should not the V6 model cost more than the 09 TSX Navi? To make more sense cause its a higher trim level. Making at least 33-34K would be fair. But honestly.... that just pushes it near the TL price and TL has 280HP. Why would you pay almost the same price for a lower level car, and less power? The TSX is made with Inline4 for a reason. So people can step up to a TL for a V6 if they want a V6. TL is 34K start. Seems fair enough for a V6 Acura. V6 280HP for 34K seems fair for a TL. But a V6 TSX with 240 HP and for 34K? Acura trying to kill themselves?
Because... A V6 would clearly be a higher trim than a navi inline 4 trim? 2K more than the Navi trim.
It can't be 32K cause the V6 Trim will probably be higher than navi inline4 trim.
Last edited by IDanceTooMuch; 12-30-2008 at 07:16 PM.
12-30-2008, 07:12 PM
#300
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2007
Age: 45
Posts: 2,573
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
12-30-2008, 07:14 PM
#301
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2007
Age: 45
Posts: 2,573
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
09 TSX
Base : 29K
Navi: 32K
Should not the V6 model cost more than the 09 TSX Navi? To make more sense cause its a higher trim level. Making at least 33-34K would be fair. But honestly.... that just pushes it near the TL price and TL has 280HP. Why would you pay almost the same price for a lower level car, and less power? The TSX is made with Inline4 for a reason. So people can step up to a TL for a V6 if they want a V6. TL is 34K start. Seems fair enough for a V6 Acura. V6 280HP for 34K seems fair for a TL. But a V6 TSX with 240 HP and for 34K? Acura trying to kill themselves?
Base : 29K
Navi: 32K
Should not the V6 model cost more than the 09 TSX Navi? To make more sense cause its a higher trim level. Making at least 33-34K would be fair. But honestly.... that just pushes it near the TL price and TL has 280HP. Why would you pay almost the same price for a lower level car, and less power? The TSX is made with Inline4 for a reason. So people can step up to a TL for a V6 if they want a V6. TL is 34K start. Seems fair enough for a V6 Acura. V6 280HP for 34K seems fair for a TL. But a V6 TSX with 240 HP and for 34K? Acura trying to kill themselves?
12-30-2008, 07:18 PM
#302
5th Gear
Join Date: Dec 2008
Age: 34
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My proof: Makes more sense to be Base > Navi > V6 base > V6 Navi? Who the fuck would do Base > V6 base > Inline 4 navi > V6 Navi. How does a Navi make it cost more than a V6 and 240HP engine? Logic please.
You can't compare that.... IS250 is a sports sedan, and ES250 is a luxury sedan. DIFFERENT. AKA different feel on handling and comfort.
Okay lets say it is the same price 32K. I can pay 2K more for a TL with 40more HP. and better luxury. Acura will get ripped off.
Also you don't understand Acura made TSX as a lower level TL. Basically a Trim. TSX is like a inline4 TL thought of that? Can't you see? Base TSX 29K > NAVI TSX 32K > TL (V6 280HP) Base 34K? DON't you see it move up??!?!?!?!?!!?!?!? they just name them diffferent. this is how they make there money. If you want a V6 step up to a TL.
You can't compare that.... IS250 is a sports sedan, and ES250 is a luxury sedan. DIFFERENT. AKA different feel on handling and comfort.
Okay lets say it is the same price 32K. I can pay 2K more for a TL with 40more HP. and better luxury. Acura will get ripped off.
Also you don't understand Acura made TSX as a lower level TL. Basically a Trim. TSX is like a inline4 TL thought of that? Can't you see? Base TSX 29K > NAVI TSX 32K > TL (V6 280HP) Base 34K? DON't you see it move up??!?!?!?!?!!?!?!? they just name them diffferent. this is how they make there money. If you want a V6 step up to a TL.
Last edited by IDanceTooMuch; 12-30-2008 at 07:22 PM.
12-30-2008, 07:57 PM
#303
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2007
Age: 45
Posts: 2,573
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My proof: Makes more sense to be Base > Navi > V6 base > V6 Navi? Who the fuck would do Base > V6 base > Inline 4 navi > V6 Navi. How does a Navi make it cost more than a V6 and 240HP engine? Logic please.
You can't compare that.... IS250 is a sports sedan, and ES250 is a luxury sedan. DIFFERENT. AKA different feel on handling and comfort.
Okay lets say it is the same price 32K. I can pay 2K more for a TL with 40more HP. and better luxury. Acura will get ripped off.
Also you don't understand Acura made TSX as a lower level TL. Basically a Trim. TSX is like a inline4 TL thought of that? Can't you see? Base TSX 29K > NAVI TSX 32K > TL (V6 280HP) Base 34K? DON't you see it move up??!?!?!?!?!!?!?!? they just name them diffferent. this is how they make there money. If you want a V6 step up to a TL.
You can't compare that.... IS250 is a sports sedan, and ES250 is a luxury sedan. DIFFERENT. AKA different feel on handling and comfort.
Okay lets say it is the same price 32K. I can pay 2K more for a TL with 40more HP. and better luxury. Acura will get ripped off.
Also you don't understand Acura made TSX as a lower level TL. Basically a Trim. TSX is like a inline4 TL thought of that? Can't you see? Base TSX 29K > NAVI TSX 32K > TL (V6 280HP) Base 34K? DON't you see it move up??!?!?!?!?!!?!?!? they just name them diffferent. this is how they make there money. If you want a V6 step up to a TL.
The TL is quite a bit larger than the TSX. The TSX is similar in size to the previous TL but they don't make those anymore.
12-30-2008, 09:07 PM
#304
My only car is a Bus
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Republik of Kalifornia
Posts: 3,254
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Nobody outside of the N. American market seems to want a V6 TSX/Accord so will this be enough to build it? I think not. Aside from the diesel, what engines are not offered in all Acura/Honda models sold around the world? I think the answer is 'none.'
MB, BMW, and Audi all offer different engines in different countries in the same models. For example, in Europe you can buy a base E Class with a manual and a 4 cylinder with a supercharger. I don't see Honda doing this.
MB, BMW, and Audi all offer different engines in different countries in the same models. For example, in Europe you can buy a base E Class with a manual and a 4 cylinder with a supercharger. I don't see Honda doing this.
12-30-2008, 09:16 PM
#305
I thought we were through calling people 'idiots'? Cause if we are still doing so....
Look no further that the 2009 Acura TL for proof that Acura is willing to price two models closely with different feature sets:
Base $34,955
SH-AWD $38,505
Base w/Tech $38,685
SH-AWD w/Tech $42,235
I could easily see a V6 TSX priced lower than a Tech package 4 cylinder. Some people want the tech and don't care about the V6 and others want the 6 cylinder and don't care about the tech.
Look no further that the 2009 Acura TL for proof that Acura is willing to price two models closely with different feature sets:
Base $34,955
SH-AWD $38,505
Base w/Tech $38,685
SH-AWD w/Tech $42,235
I could easily see a V6 TSX priced lower than a Tech package 4 cylinder. Some people want the tech and don't care about the V6 and others want the 6 cylinder and don't care about the tech.
12-30-2008, 09:22 PM
#306
Advanced
Whatever motor Acura decides to put into the TSX, it has to have a high performance quotient. Putting a moderately tuned J35 VCM equipped motor into the TSX chassis would be a mistake; made even worst if they decided to limit transmission choice to the 5-speed automatic. Omit SHAWD and you’re essentially marketing a tech-laden NA Accord with less interior room – it may have slightly better handling while conversely being heavier AND possibly slower. Delete VCM and add a higher state of tune to the J35 motor, with choice of manual and automatic transmissions, and a limited slip differential, then you’re back to a less roomy 3rd-Gen TL type S. However, throw in a 300+ hp J37 and SHAWD with a choice of 6-speed automatic and manual transmissions; you have something that’s more compelling, potentially stealing some sales for the 4th-Gen TL.
Let’s put it this way: The 1st-Gen TSX was fun. The 2nd-Gen TSX while more refined and an improvement in most areas vs. the 1st-Gen; is slightly less fun (courtesy of the numbed-down steering): Other caveats include reduced rear seat headroom and the aural characteristics (buzz) of the 4-cylinder mill that seems more prevalent in the 2nd-Gen car. The TSX’s brilliance is/was its overall balance. Not overly biased in any one attribute. In its day; the 1-Gen TSX gained notoriety within the NA entry level quasi-performance/luxury sedan segment with favorable reception by the press and by beating initial sales expectations.
Regardless, an up-motored TSX offering should be fun and not a neutered, tepid, watered down effort for the sake of intra-marketing. Heck, even a lighter weight, higher performing FWD TSX with LSD and an enhanced K24 motor wouldn’t necessarily be a bad thing provided pricing remains in check. Keeping the TSX as-is with no other motive improvements would inevitably doom it to automotive obscurity.
BTW – Per various Temple of Vtec (TOV) forums, VCM equates to a loss of Vtec functionality: http://www.vtec.net/articles/view-ar...icle_id=702520
Also, check out the you-tube motorweek clips for the 2008 Accord Coupe 6MT. That’s the type of performance a V6 TSX should have: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=15vVdJzdhG4
Let’s put it this way: The 1st-Gen TSX was fun. The 2nd-Gen TSX while more refined and an improvement in most areas vs. the 1st-Gen; is slightly less fun (courtesy of the numbed-down steering): Other caveats include reduced rear seat headroom and the aural characteristics (buzz) of the 4-cylinder mill that seems more prevalent in the 2nd-Gen car. The TSX’s brilliance is/was its overall balance. Not overly biased in any one attribute. In its day; the 1-Gen TSX gained notoriety within the NA entry level quasi-performance/luxury sedan segment with favorable reception by the press and by beating initial sales expectations.
Regardless, an up-motored TSX offering should be fun and not a neutered, tepid, watered down effort for the sake of intra-marketing. Heck, even a lighter weight, higher performing FWD TSX with LSD and an enhanced K24 motor wouldn’t necessarily be a bad thing provided pricing remains in check. Keeping the TSX as-is with no other motive improvements would inevitably doom it to automotive obscurity.
BTW – Per various Temple of Vtec (TOV) forums, VCM equates to a loss of Vtec functionality: http://www.vtec.net/articles/view-ar...icle_id=702520
Also, check out the you-tube motorweek clips for the 2008 Accord Coupe 6MT. That’s the type of performance a V6 TSX should have: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=15vVdJzdhG4
12-30-2008, 09:28 PM
#307
Acura could drop in the V6 to go 'full luxury' to take on the ES. No MT, No SH-AWD, just a nice quiet sedan with a smooth ride. There would be a genuine market for such a vehicle.
12-30-2008, 10:06 PM
#309
dɐɹɔ ǝɥʇ ʇɐɥʍ
That is interesting, a syrupy smooth V6 with at least a 6 speed auto. The current Honda/Acura V6's are probably not smooth enough. Add a little extra sound dampening, softer suspension with larger sway bars(with in reason) and luxury goodies galore... which is the area I think Acura is lagging. Smart key, intelligent key, what ever you call it, people want it! Ventilated seats, internal hard drive for music, panoramic sunroof, heated rear seats... these little gizmo's would help the car stand out and attract the ES market. I see a TON of ES's on the road, there must be a reason for it!
12-31-2008, 12:27 AM
#310
That is interesting, a syrupy smooth V6 with at least a 6 speed auto. The current Honda/Acura V6's are probably not smooth enough. Add a little extra sound dampening, softer suspension with larger sway bars(with in reason) and luxury goodies galore... which is the area I think Acura is lagging. Smart key, intelligent key, what ever you call it, people want it! Ventilated seats, internal hard drive for music, panoramic sunroof, heated rear seats... these little gizmo's would help the car stand out and attract the ES market. I see a TON of ES's on the road, there must be a reason for it!
TSX lacks some of the gizmos like HDDnavigation with rearview camera lines/Pushbutton/LED lights/bigger turn signals/kneeairbags/park assist/AFS of TL/ES.
2009 model years cars are already out and Honda/Acura is stuck with 5speed Auto. TSX is the heaviest FWD non-turbo 4 cylinder car. It weighs close to ES.
Adding V6 to it will add alteast 300lbs that will have impact on performance/fuel efficiency/handling. VCM is good for light weight $25K EX Accord but not for $35K TSX with premium fuel.
I brought Passat because People here comparing Applies and Oranges.
Passat 2.0L turbo is 2004 model year engine. with 200bhp & 207 ft-torque
After that 211 bhp/258 ft-lb year 2008 A4 newer turbo with better fuel efficiency. that brings 0-60 mph to 6.2 second for 3800lb sedan.
New 2.0 TFSI 270 bhp in Audi S3/TT is already out.
And within one year. 8 speed Automatic will come with turbo.
See the fast progress. with turbo u need less hp to produce same performance result because of massive low end pull.
What Honda is doing. It started with 2.7 V6, than went to 3.0V6/3.2V6/3.5V6 and now 3.7 V6. The size of car both in length & width to carry such engines correspondingly got bigger. Lexus stopped at 190inch for Both ES/GS
& cars are narrower and more aerodynamic with better fuel economy/performance.
So do u think they are going to increase the cubic capacity of V6 engines?. They are already at the dead end just like 5speed Auto. V6 in Honda car is failure around the world including US when you compared to competition.
V6 in IS is acceptable as they still outsell TSX but V6 in TSX will be sales disaster. Similar is situation with ES/TL.
12-31-2008, 01:19 AM
#311
I thought we were through calling people 'idiots'? Cause if we are still doing so....
Look no further that the 2009 Acura TL for proof that Acura is willing to price two models closely with different feature sets:
Base $34,955
SH-AWD $38,505
Base w/Tech $38,685
SH-AWD w/Tech $42,235
I could easily see a V6 TSX priced lower than a Tech package 4 cylinder. Some people want the tech and don't care about the V6 and others want the 6 cylinder and don't care about the tech.
Look no further that the 2009 Acura TL for proof that Acura is willing to price two models closely with different feature sets:
Base $34,955
SH-AWD $38,505
Base w/Tech $38,685
SH-AWD w/Tech $42,235
I could easily see a V6 TSX priced lower than a Tech package 4 cylinder. Some people want the tech and don't care about the V6 and others want the 6 cylinder and don't care about the tech.
Its very different issue when upgrade from 4 cylinder to 6 cylinder with huge difference in displacement. There is very nice chart of MB models. From 1.8L to 3.5L V6 for C-Class MB models and see the jump in weight increase from 4 cylinder to V6 engines in Sport models.
I can only see 3.5L TSX if Acura wants to discontinue FWD TL and concentrate only on TL-SH-AWD.
12-31-2008, 06:46 AM
#312
Instructor
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If Acura is gonna do something like Base, Navi, V6 Base, V6 Navi, V6 Navi SH-AWD. They gonna lose money, thats too much just for the TSX. Lets say they do this. Right now the Base TSX 09 is 29K. Navi TSX 32K. So V6 Base lets say 34K. V6 Navi 36K. V6 NAVI SH-AWD 38-40K. The TSX WILL NOT GET THIS EXPENSIVE. IF they do this, they are just making the TSX another TL. WHICH THEY WON'T DO. TAKE YOUR RUMOR AND SHOVE IT UP UR ASS. YOU IDIOT. A V6 BASE IS 34K RIGHT? JUST A GUESS.
To be fair and let me prove my point. a V6 Base TSX will probably cost 34K. Because the Inline4 TSX Navi is 32K. A V6 trim is logically higher if they are making a V6 TSX. 2K is a fair price up. Thread start said it will have 240HP V6. Okay.... For 34K. The TL Base model is V6 280HP for 34K also. Why the fuck would Acura make the TSX the same price as the TL but the TL has more HP. HUH? Don't say the V6 TSX will be less than 34K because it won't be. it cant be cheaper than a inline4 navi model cause that don't make sense.
Clearly Logic just proved this thread starter is dip shit that needs to gtfo.
I didn't say full redesign.
I didn't brag using it as proof tsx does fine w/o a V6.
Also why would the TSX V6 won't be at least 34K+? when the Inline 4 base navi is 32K. how you gonna tell me a V6 model is cheaper than a base navi.
To be fair and let me prove my point. a V6 Base TSX will probably cost 34K. Because the Inline4 TSX Navi is 32K. A V6 trim is logically higher if they are making a V6 TSX. 2K is a fair price up. Thread start said it will have 240HP V6. Okay.... For 34K. The TL Base model is V6 280HP for 34K also. Why the fuck would Acura make the TSX the same price as the TL but the TL has more HP. HUH? Don't say the V6 TSX will be less than 34K because it won't be. it cant be cheaper than a inline4 navi model cause that don't make sense.
Clearly Logic just proved this thread starter is dip shit that needs to gtfo.
I didn't say full redesign.
I didn't brag using it as proof tsx does fine w/o a V6.
Also why would the TSX V6 won't be at least 34K+? when the Inline 4 base navi is 32K. how you gonna tell me a V6 model is cheaper than a base navi.
After 8 pages, and some repetitive discussions, is it safe to say we can all agree to disagree and see how it plays out?
12-31-2008, 10:18 AM
#313
Advanced
However, that elicits a rhetorical question: Why compete with an established crowd in a crowded segment, throughout distressed economic conditions with me-too engineering? What is there to be gained by chasing other name brands i.e. Audi, BMW, Infiniti, Lexus, Mercedes, and so forth in the pursuit of “Tier One Status”? That’s what is great about the TSX. It has carved out a notch for itself in the North American near-luxury segment with a normally aspirated 4-cylinder. That is something that no other manufacturers have done with any degree of consistency. While Honda remains innovative and fresh, it proves successful. When it tentative, stalls, reverses direction, and doesn’t deliver on promises, it proves disastrous – forward to the RL, and NSX replacement. A V6 motor may be acceptable for the North American TSX segment as long as it provides a compelling performance improvement vs. the current K24 motor and it’s entertaining. However, it would be more remarkable if Acura/Honda could lighten up the chassis, improve fore-aft balance, and squeeze more power from the K engine – more from less, so to speak. Or even leverage against some of their past experience with implementation of IMA for the North American V6 Accord. Tie this in with the 4-cylinder and you may have a viable non-turbo/V6 alternative for the TSX and more in line with the ROW Accord. Even though this effort failed with the previous NA Accord, there are sure to have been some lessons learned from that effort. Heck, just stick a hot motor in the car, a good transmission with option for a manual, keep the weight in check, and maintain a competitive price. You’ll have a winner for sure.
12-31-2008, 10:59 AM
#314
Three Wheelin'
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Somewhere out there
Age: 47
Posts: 1,270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
However, that elicits a rhetorical question: Why compete with an established crowd in a crowded segment, throughout distressed economic conditions with me-too engineering? What is there to be gained by chasing other name brands i.e. Audi, BMW, Infiniti, Lexus, Mercedes, and so forth in the pursuit of “Tier One Status”? That’s what is great about the TSX. It has carved out a notch for itself in the North American near-luxury segment with a normally aspirated 4-cylinder. That is something that no other manufacturers have done with any degree of consistency. While Honda remains innovative and fresh, it proves successful. When it tentative, stalls, reverses direction, and doesn’t deliver on promises, it proves disastrous – forward to the RL, and NSX replacement. A V6 motor may be acceptable for the North American TSX segment as long as it provides a compelling performance improvement vs. the current K24 motor and it’s entertaining. However, it would be more remarkable if Acura/Honda could lighten up the chassis, improve fore-aft balance, and squeeze more power from the K engine – more from less, so to speak. Or even leverage against some of their past experience with implementation of IMA for the North American V6 Accord. Tie this in with the 4-cylinder and you may have a viable non-turbo/V6 alternative for the TSX and more in line with the ROW Accord. Even though this effort failed with the previous NA Accord, there are sure to have been some lessons learned from that effort. Heck, just stick a hot motor in the car, a good transmission with option for a manual, keep the weight in check, and maintain a competitive price. You’ll have a winner for sure.
A High rev I4 TSX would essentially just be another Civic Si. That would be not only redundant, but anti-luxury. A safe move that would be much more successful would be a V6 TSX. An IMA (aka Hybrid) TSX might work, but it might have the same problem as the old Accord hybrid (overpriced underperform).
So the best thing for Acura to do is add a V6 option to the TSX.
12-31-2008, 11:28 AM
#315
Three Wheelin'
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Somewhere out there
Age: 47
Posts: 1,270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Acura has very limited global exposure. They just canned Japanese launch. In China few hundred sales in year wont make difference and that due to MDX.
Acura was rescued by MDX (family van).
This is 2007 when China booming. what will happen in 2009? or do u think Honda corporate strategy does not take into account Market?
Acura was rescued by MDX (family van).
This is 2007 when China booming. what will happen in 2009? or do u think Honda corporate strategy does not take into account Market?
12-31-2008, 12:13 PM
#316
Honda's way of getting extra (NA) power is by spinning it faster. I'm no expert on 'tuning' but by all accounts, most say that you can't rev the K 24 much higher (and still offer a 6/70 powertrain warranty). They could put the F22C in there as I mentioned many pages ago, but they are not keen to repeat the Integra GS-R (sedan) experiment.
The majority of Americans have shown time and time again, that they do not want high revving manual transmission cars. Acura's least expensive V6 car is pushing 35K. There was a time when the TL was 28K and the time might be right for another low 30's V6 sedan.
Edit: Oh, and to respond to the first part of your question. That niche is not as crowded as you mention. BMW, Infiniti, MB do not offer a 'small' FWD sedan in the low 30's. Lexus has the ES as mentioned, but its much higher in price (nicely equipped) and Audi.... well they're just Audi, they don't come close on reliability.
Last edited by Colin; 12-31-2008 at 12:17 PM.
12-31-2008, 12:24 PM
#317
TL/ES share with Accord/Camry. Which make it cheaper for platform development for specific engines. TSX share with 4 cylinder EuroAccord. There no mass volume platform to share costs of V6.
12-31-2008, 12:29 PM
#318
First off, I mentioned that there are things they could do to lighten the car, but they would all drive the price up. In an entry level car, that's counter to the goal of keeping it 'entry level'
Honda's way of getting extra (NA) power is by spinning it faster. I'm no expert on 'tuning' but by all accounts, most say that you can't rev the K 24 much higher (and still offer a 6/70 powertrain warranty). They could put the F22C in there as I mentioned many pages ago, but they are not keen to repeat the Integra GS-R (sedan) experiment.
The majority of Americans have shown time and time again, that they do not want high revving manual transmission cars. Acura's least expensive V6 car is pushing 35K. There was a time when the TL was 28K and the time might be right for another low 30's V6 sedan.
Edit: Oh, and to respond to the first part of your question. That niche is not as crowded as you mention. BMW, Infiniti, MB do not offer a 'small' FWD sedan in the low 30's. Lexus has the ES as mentioned, but its much higher in price (nicely equipped) and Audi.... well they're just Audi, they don't come close on reliability.
Honda's way of getting extra (NA) power is by spinning it faster. I'm no expert on 'tuning' but by all accounts, most say that you can't rev the K 24 much higher (and still offer a 6/70 powertrain warranty). They could put the F22C in there as I mentioned many pages ago, but they are not keen to repeat the Integra GS-R (sedan) experiment.
The majority of Americans have shown time and time again, that they do not want high revving manual transmission cars. Acura's least expensive V6 car is pushing 35K. There was a time when the TL was 28K and the time might be right for another low 30's V6 sedan.
Edit: Oh, and to respond to the first part of your question. That niche is not as crowded as you mention. BMW, Infiniti, MB do not offer a 'small' FWD sedan in the low 30's. Lexus has the ES as mentioned, but its much higher in price (nicely equipped) and Audi.... well they're just Audi, they don't come close on reliability.
$28K V6 Acura new is 8 years old story. It cannot be replicated with current features and requirements.
12-31-2008, 12:31 PM
#319
SSFTSX, why don't you put me on your 'ignore list'
12-31-2008, 12:39 PM
#320
Three Wheelin'
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Somewhere out there
Age: 47
Posts: 1,270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Increasing sales by few hundred and that entirely due to MDX as utility vehicle. Other Premium SUVs are expensive.
TL/ES share with Accord/Camry. Which make it cheaper for platform development for specific engines. TSX share with 4 cylinder EuroAccord. There no mass volume platform to share costs of V6.
TL/ES share with Accord/Camry. Which make it cheaper for platform development for specific engines. TSX share with 4 cylinder EuroAccord. There no mass volume platform to share costs of V6.
Prices and weight of car inreased due to added safety/emission/stability requirements with time not to mention more standard features in premium segment. as economic models like Fit/Civic pushing to $22K band.
$28K V6 Acura new is 8 years old story. It cannot be replicated with current features and requirements.
$28K V6 Acura new is 8 years old story. It cannot be replicated with current features and requirements.