Drove this\/ over the weekend. What a letdown. Initially I was impressed with the handling and 25mpg's, but I was really let down when I tried to pass on the freeway. 60-80 in 12sec. What a shame Acura never put a turbo in the TSX.

 

I go from 60 to 80 on the freeway all the time, and I guarantee you it doesn't take me 12 seconds.

 

12 seconds??

 

Don't be so sensitive. I was exaggerating. Do you have a 60-80 time for your car?My point is the 4cyl-with slushbox is slow as hell. This car would have been a much better choice than the RDX for a turbo. It really is a missed opportunity for Acura.
I should have used Dynomaster to get an actual time...maybe someone who has a C&D time for 60-80mph could chime in...

 

Fast as a lambo...

 

this is my 2010 TSX (manual transmission) doing 40-80:
it's not lightning fast, but it's still got pretty good passing power on the highway. did you drive an auto? $10 says you did...

 

The 4-cylinder auto TSX is slow.

In other news, leaves this year will become green.

 

as a side note, it looks like you have a 2007 RDX? that vehicle is pretty bad. ~18 MPG, absolutely unacceptable ride, cheap feeling plastics all over the interior, and ugly to boot. i'll keep my fun-to-drive, ~25 / 31 MPG 6-speed TSX and you can have your 1 second advantage in the 0-60 and 40-80 runs...

 

Yep, slush-o-matic.
I was so disappointed. It's such a great car. Love the interior, the size, especially loved those gauges (your video highlights their beauty)! It's so nimble on it's feet, I was expecting a little more under the hood.

 

I have 19mpg on the mid right now. I'm not here to knock the TSX, so if putting down my RDX makes you feel better...
I'll restate my point, some of you just aren't getting it.
The RDX is too heavy. The TSX should have gotten the turbo.

 

Respectable for a 4 banger, maybe you should try driving a 4cyl civic for a week and then come back to the TSX.


Track Test Results Acceleration, 0-30 mph (sec.)3.3 0-45 mph (sec.)5.5 0-60 mph (sec.)8.6 0-75 mph (sec.)12.6 1/4-mile (sec. @ mph)16.3 @ 86.0 0-60 with 1 foot of rollout (sec.)8.3 Braking, 30-0 mph (ft.)34 60-0 mph (ft.)133 Slalom, 6 x 100 ft. (mph)63.9 Skid pad, 200-ft. diameter (lateral g)0.79 Sound level @ idle (dB)47.2 @ Full throttle (dB)75 @ 70 mph cruise (dB)65.5



From Edmunds:
http://www.edmunds.com/acura/tsx/2009/road-test.html

'the 2.4 does a decent job of getting the 3,400-pound TSX up to speed. We clocked the 0-60-mph sprint at 8.6 seconds, with the quarter-mile run taking 16.3 seconds. '
Definitely not a Vette or 5.0...


But also:
"With 201 horsepower and 170 pound-feet of torque, output is certainly adequate and now more useful in everyday driving, but shoppers keen on spicy acceleration will find more to like from turbocharged or V6-powered competitors."

And:
'There's solid midrange punch on tap for passing and merging, too. But stats mongers will note that most V6-equipped family sedans would still have no trouble showing their taillights to the TSX, beating it to 60 by 1 or 2 seconds. In the real world, a mid-8-second car will be more than quick enough for most folks.'

 

Test drive the v6, its way fun.

 

wait did you not test drive the car first to see if you'll like the way it drives? you kind of sound utterly disappointed in your car's engine...maybe you should've gotten the v6?

 

With the above said, YESSSSS, I wish these cars would've come stock w a turbo or at least the option for one.

 

I'm guessing the OP was driving a loaner... and yes, I was a bit sensitive because I felt that 12 seconds was too ridiculous of a number. Thank you for clarifying that it was an exaggeration.

The TSX is by no means a fast car, but like anything in life it depends on what you're looking for and what your needs are.

P.S. Someone should do a study on how forum avatars affect responses to a post. I think seeing the old lady avatar affected how I responded.

 

Also, water is wet. Who knew?!

 

that 8+ seconds is in the AUTO, not the MANUAL. there's a huge huge difference in the way the manual is geared vs the auto.

 

Yeah 60-80 is fun! Downshift to 4th and and you get there quick enough! Hopefully a turbo/sc/ engine management will be coming soon. Our 1st gen tsx's with forced induction are pretty mean. It'll happen for us 2nd gens soon!

 

Faster or slower? I'm fine with 8 seconds, if I wanted something fast I would've got a an s2k...

 

If I wanted something fast I would have waited for the 335is that I'd paid a deposit for...

 

That's why the 3.5 V6 from the TL is offered as an option. Comparing a TL to a TSX 4cyl AT is not fair. If only Acura offered the TSX V6 with a 6spd manual like the previous generation TL-S,

 

I feel like the sprint to 60 is quicker than that...heck, the manual does it in 7.0-7.2, from what I read...there's no way that 80 lbs, and tighter gears makes that big of a difference

on another note, i feel like 3rd gear gets up to 120 without a problem too. Its just as fast/slow as an is250 awd.

 

Actually gearing makes a huge difference. Although it is also due to the fact that autos typically have more mechanical resistance in them, and therefore an automatic car will put down less hp to the wheels than in a manual car. The auto also shifts slower than the 6mt.

 

+1 6MT are faster, there is no way around it.

 

The problem lies with what you see in the center of the tach...

Makes me appreciate the 6MT.

 

 

Until Acura goes to AWD in the TSX (and they won't because it will be the same price as a TL), the current V6 is all it can handle.

With that said, I believe my 1997 Accord Coupe MT could keep up with my TSX on some twisties.

 

Autos make such a difference - the 6MT TSX feels quicker than the auto V6 Accord, and even against the clock it's not much behind. If performance is so important then at least get a RWD car. FWD over a certain hp/torque just gives you more wheel spin/torque steer and/or traction control intervention - none of which (IMHO) is very enjoyable. The MT TSXs main attraction is surely nice balanced handling, great turn-in for an FWD car, an enjoyable noise, and above all, a sublime gearchange. EPS apart it's a near perfect daily driver.

 

Exactly! this car would be a fucking rocket that corners like a snake in a rat hole with a TURBO. Then I might actually consider a TSX.

 

Wow??[mr742 0-60 mph (sec.)8.6] That's on par with the 1973 AMC Hornet Hatchback. Must be the slushbox thing. When it is cool I pull less than 6.5 in the RDX. Mine dyno'd 200 hp to the 4 wheels after the ETS intercooler was installed, but before the intake. (google "ETS intercooler rdx") I have yet to take it in for another run. The TSX could easily pull 220+ to the wheels without pushing those extra drive-train parts.
Just think, you could keep that great handling with a LSD.

 

Never compared my TL to the TSX. We are talking about turbos here. But let's talk about the TL V-6(3.7). It's too damn heavy. Lots of understeer on mine at the autocross. That's why the TSX (2.4) with a turbo would beat the shit out of my TL on the street or a tight autocross course. The car is light and handles great out of the box. Now all it needs is 50 more hp.
v-6 = understeer in the TSX....

 

right on, mr marco!
although, you're asking a lot less from the turbo. (you only want 50 more horsies!?)

on the 04-08 TL's we've gotten to a very safe 400hp with an aftermarket turbo setup! J&R performance ftw!

I bet the tsx can handle up to 350 without any stress to drivetrain!
but, I dont think ultimate power is what you're after.
at 240whp, my TL is super fun to drive!

 

Where's the damn 'Like' button?

 

should have offered the TSX with a turbo engine instead of a V6 from the TL.

 

Should have offered built in toilet in drivers chair.

Should have offered a lifetime supply of sour patch kids with every car purchase.

Should have offered V10 hybrid 102% efficient engine that powers itself.

 

102% efficiency on a regenerative otto cycle that spits out money every time you turn the car on.

 

transmission and gearing makes a significant difference. you should watch a video of the 5AT shifting and then one of the 6MT. another gear and closer ratios means that the 6MT can stay in a better part of the power band when shifting at the fuel cutoff around ~7300RPM.

 

The great never ending debate of the 5AT haha

I do wish it came with more power but not @ the expense of the v6 weight. Having said that getting the TSX I knew I wasn't gunna win no races lol. 280 hp from an i4 would be great.

Makes me really wonder what would happen if I got the i135 but reason held out for more space 2 more doors & Japanese value lol

 

^how much does the i4 TSX weigh?

Edit* i did the homework.
the I4 weighs about 180lbs less than the V6

 

According to the automotive folk the I4 weighs 3,400 pounds ima assume that's dry weight