The Official 2009 TSX Thread **Unvelied in NY**
#242
Racer
if the HP numbers are anywhere acurate in those articles. I think the tsx-s will be a failure.
they're saying the base will have 235-245 hp and fwd. then they're saying 260 hp for an awd turbo model. the extra weight of the sh-awd system will probably negate most of the hp increase from the base model.
as an awd turbo vehicle I don't think the tsx can compete with subaru. they have the legacy gt which will be on par with the tsx and then they have the sti which will be much faster than the tsx can ever hope to be.
I personally hope that they do get the tsx up to 240ish hp, fix the gearing in the 6 speed transmission, and lower the vtec point to around 5k instead of 6k rpms.
they're saying the base will have 235-245 hp and fwd. then they're saying 260 hp for an awd turbo model. the extra weight of the sh-awd system will probably negate most of the hp increase from the base model.
as an awd turbo vehicle I don't think the tsx can compete with subaru. they have the legacy gt which will be on par with the tsx and then they have the sti which will be much faster than the tsx can ever hope to be.
I personally hope that they do get the tsx up to 240ish hp, fix the gearing in the 6 speed transmission, and lower the vtec point to around 5k instead of 6k rpms.
#243
Intermediate
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Jackson, MS
Age: 39
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by gftgrill
I personally hope that they do get the tsx up to 240ish hp, fix the gearing in the 6 speed transmission, and lower the vtec point to around 5k instead of 6k rpms.
#244
E92
Originally Posted by gftgrill
if the HP numbers are anywhere acurate in those articles. I think the tsx-s will be a failure.
they're saying the base will have 235-245 hp and fwd. then they're saying 260 hp for an awd turbo model. the extra weight of the sh-awd system will probably negate most of the hp increase from the base model.
as an awd turbo vehicle I don't think the tsx can compete with subaru. they have the legacy gt which will be on par with the tsx and then they have the sti which will be much faster than the tsx can ever hope to be.
I personally hope that they do get the tsx up to 240ish hp, fix the gearing in the 6 speed transmission, and lower the vtec point to around 5k instead of 6k rpms.
they're saying the base will have 235-245 hp and fwd. then they're saying 260 hp for an awd turbo model. the extra weight of the sh-awd system will probably negate most of the hp increase from the base model.
as an awd turbo vehicle I don't think the tsx can compete with subaru. they have the legacy gt which will be on par with the tsx and then they have the sti which will be much faster than the tsx can ever hope to be.
I personally hope that they do get the tsx up to 240ish hp, fix the gearing in the 6 speed transmission, and lower the vtec point to around 5k instead of 6k rpms.
#245
Racer
Originally Posted by TommySalami
Well, the TSX is first and foremost a luxury car. The STI isn't even close to luxury, and while the Legacy is nice, it shouldn't be able to compete with the '09 TSX if Acura does things right.
The legacy is very comparable. it has a very similar feature sheet as the TSX. for just under 34k, you get the legacy gt spec b turbocharged boxer 6 engine with navigation and a 6 speed MANUAL transmission. from everything I've seen the type s will be an automatic with padel shifters. that alone will keep me from ever buying one.
I've heard on the SH AWD acuras you have to change the differential fluid every 10k miles. that just sounds like a pain in the ass to me.
as an awd turbo car, I think the tsx type s will be a failure just like the rdx.
#246
Don't forget during facelift, Type-S can get some horsepower boost to something that at least match the Honda Accord V-6 horsepower level.
I still don't think Acura's manual tranny works with the SH-AWD system yet. Let's hope down the road (2010?) it will.
I still don't think Acura's manual tranny works with the SH-AWD system yet. Let's hope down the road (2010?) it will.
![2 Cents](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/smilies/2cents.gif)
#247
Originally Posted by gftgrill
if the HP numbers are anywhere acurate in those articles. I think the tsx-s will be a failure.
they're saying the base will have 235-245 hp and fwd. then they're saying 260 hp for an awd turbo model. the extra weight of the sh-awd system will probably negate most of the hp increase from the base model.
as an awd turbo vehicle I don't think the tsx can compete with subaru. they have the legacy gt which will be on par with the tsx and then they have the sti which will be much faster than the tsx can ever hope to be.
I personally hope that they do get the tsx up to 240ish hp, fix the gearing in the 6 speed transmission, and lower the vtec point to around 5k instead of 6k rpms.
they're saying the base will have 235-245 hp and fwd. then they're saying 260 hp for an awd turbo model. the extra weight of the sh-awd system will probably negate most of the hp increase from the base model.
as an awd turbo vehicle I don't think the tsx can compete with subaru. they have the legacy gt which will be on par with the tsx and then they have the sti which will be much faster than the tsx can ever hope to be.
I personally hope that they do get the tsx up to 240ish hp, fix the gearing in the 6 speed transmission, and lower the vtec point to around 5k instead of 6k rpms.
#248
No offense, but it's an almost certainty that the base model 4 cylinder isn't going to have 200 lb/ft torque. Much more likely is something closer to 170/175 lb/ft. What n/a 4 cylinder engine you know of has 200 lb./ft. torque? Especially at under 2.4 liters. Just my
. Carry on.
![2 Cents](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/smilies/2cents.gif)
![Thumbs Up](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/smilies/thumbsup.gif)
#249
Also, while I realize all the rumors are touting a 20-30 hp increase for the base model, I would expect something a little more modest & reasonable like maybe a 15-20 hp increase. Certainly nothing as drastic as a 30-40 hp increase like some of us here seem to think.
Maybe it's just me, but a 235-245 hp K24 4-cylinder base model seems a bit too optimistic wouldn't you say? Without additions like A-VTEC and/or a substantial boost in compression, I don't see the base model engine putting out up to (or more than) 100hp/L w/out negative impacts on low-midrange drivability. And that's precisely the output the K24 engine will be making at a rating of 235-245 n/a hp with a displacement around 2.35 L.
My whole point is that though hp/tq improvements will likely be made to & should probably be expected for the 09'+ TSX, we should expect them to be a bit more moderate than what some of us are expecting/hoping. Again just my 2 cents. Carry on gents! :-)
Maybe it's just me, but a 235-245 hp K24 4-cylinder base model seems a bit too optimistic wouldn't you say? Without additions like A-VTEC and/or a substantial boost in compression, I don't see the base model engine putting out up to (or more than) 100hp/L w/out negative impacts on low-midrange drivability. And that's precisely the output the K24 engine will be making at a rating of 235-245 n/a hp with a displacement around 2.35 L.
My whole point is that though hp/tq improvements will likely be made to & should probably be expected for the 09'+ TSX, we should expect them to be a bit more moderate than what some of us are expecting/hoping. Again just my 2 cents. Carry on gents! :-)
#250
I'm not sure why a performance increase is realy expected. Honda seems happy to undercut performance in favor of fuel economy. I know almost everyone on this forum wants more power but maybe all the ordinary people who aren't so involved with their cars are happy with how it is and wouldn't want to waste the extra gas that would come from an arbitrary increase in output.
#251
![Thumbs up](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/icons/icon14.gif)
Aspire, what you say is very true, I meant to just throw the number 200 out there to be a comparison with the turbo engine's high amount of torque
Anyway what Wakura said makes sense with many of Honda's vehicles mainly gas savers and not performance machines.
In the end, forget the base model and lets just worry about the turbo Type S
Anyway what Wakura said makes sense with many of Honda's vehicles mainly gas savers and not performance machines.
In the end, forget the base model and lets just worry about the turbo Type S
![Thumbs Up](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/smilies/thumbsup.gif)
#252
As far as bumps in power go, Honda typically goes up around 12% each time, making the next gen TSX around 230hp.
Here in North America, we're all about keeping up with the Jones'--consistently bigger wheel diameters, more hp, more torque, more features, etc. But I agree, there has to be a ceiling somewhere. Personally, I'm quite happy with 205hp.
Here in North America, we're all about keeping up with the Jones'--consistently bigger wheel diameters, more hp, more torque, more features, etc. But I agree, there has to be a ceiling somewhere. Personally, I'm quite happy with 205hp.
#253
Make a hole, coming thru!
Originally Posted by TommySalami
Well, the TSX is first and foremost a luxury car....
#254
I agree, where the Integra was like a feature rich Civic, the TSX is like a feature rich Accord (not the USDM Accord specificly). Neither car makes the kind of sacrifices to economy you associate with the majority of cars described as being luxury. The TSX is noisy, they didn't insulate it more, and they probably couldn't because it would be too slow, because the engine is too small. It's for that reason I suspect the '09 TSX specs are likely to be as boring as the spied exterior and why any expecation of luxury I have has me looking towards the new TL.
#255
6MT or Death
I'd like to halt the possible hijack before everyone gets heated and throws this thread down a different road. Personally I have no hesitations in calling the TSX a luxury car.
The industry seems pretty convinced that it's a luxury car.
https://acurazine.com/forums/showthr...ghlight=luxury
But of course people like to have their own opinions on what luxury means to them
https://acurazine.com/forums/showthr...ghlight=luxury
Search luxury to find a few threads to discuss this in.
And now...back to waiting for some REAL information on the 2009 TSX.
The industry seems pretty convinced that it's a luxury car.
https://acurazine.com/forums/showthr...ghlight=luxury
But of course people like to have their own opinions on what luxury means to them
https://acurazine.com/forums/showthr...ghlight=luxury
Search luxury to find a few threads to discuss this in.
And now...back to waiting for some REAL information on the 2009 TSX.
#256
just for perspective, my dad's 1987 Ford Taurus SHO had 200 hp.....piece of shyte car....but still 220 hp back in 1987 was pretty nice.
That being said, as we've all heard time and time again....for the money...and i repeat...for the money...the TSX is unmatched in both features and driveability.
That being said, as we've all heard time and time again....for the money...and i repeat...for the money...the TSX is unmatched in both features and driveability.
#257
Originally Posted by Aspire705
Also, while I realize all the rumors are touting a 20-30 hp increase for the base model, I would expect something a little more modest & reasonable like maybe a 15-20 hp increase. Certainly nothing as drastic as a 30-40 hp increase like some of us here seem to think.
Maybe it's just me, but a 235-245 hp K24 4-cylinder base model seems a bit too optimistic wouldn't you say? Without additions like A-VTEC and/or a substantial boost in compression, I don't see the base model engine putting out up to (or more than) 100hp/L w/out negative impacts on low-midrange drivability. And that's precisely the output the K24 engine will be making at a rating of 235-245 n/a hp with a displacement around 2.35 L.
My whole point is that though hp/tq improvements will likely be made to & should probably be expected for the 09'+ TSX, we should expect them to be a bit more moderate than what some of us are expecting/hoping. Again just my 2 cents. Carry on gents! :-)
Maybe it's just me, but a 235-245 hp K24 4-cylinder base model seems a bit too optimistic wouldn't you say? Without additions like A-VTEC and/or a substantial boost in compression, I don't see the base model engine putting out up to (or more than) 100hp/L w/out negative impacts on low-midrange drivability. And that's precisely the output the K24 engine will be making at a rating of 235-245 n/a hp with a displacement around 2.35 L.
My whole point is that though hp/tq improvements will likely be made to & should probably be expected for the 09'+ TSX, we should expect them to be a bit more moderate than what some of us are expecting/hoping. Again just my 2 cents. Carry on gents! :-)
And the beauty of the new TSX is that if it were to get the turbo setup from the RDX, we know that direct injection turbo charging produces gobs fo torque. So if the new TSX is rated at ~270hp, it will probably make close to 300 torque. So despite the horsepower, the new TSX is going to pull really hard because of all the torque.
#258
Originally Posted by Roffles
Keep in mind the new 8th generation Honda Accord has a 4-cyl that produces 190hp on regular unleaded under the strict new SAE ratings. Who's to say Honda can't massage another 30-40 horsepower out of this engine with premium fuel and more agressive tuning for the new TSX? They managed to take the 160hp (sae old) 7th generation accrod engine and make it a 205hp engine (sae new) for the current TSX.
And the beauty of the new TSX is that if it were to get the turbo setup from the RDX, we know that direct injection turbo charging produces gobs fo torque. So if the new TSX is rated at ~270hp, it will probably make close to 300 torque. So despite the horsepower, the new TSX is going to pull really hard because of all the torque.
And the beauty of the new TSX is that if it were to get the turbo setup from the RDX, we know that direct injection turbo charging produces gobs fo torque. So if the new TSX is rated at ~270hp, it will probably make close to 300 torque. So despite the horsepower, the new TSX is going to pull really hard because of all the torque.
Nope, I expect close to a 30-40 HP bump and a 50 lb/ft. bump. Can't get too far into the TL's territory, either.
#259
Senior Moderator
As long as the TL has an optional engine that makes more than the most powerful engine in the TSX does, it shouldn't be a problem. See BMW, MB, Audi, Lexus, Infiniti, etc, etc......
#261
Racer
Originally Posted by Nogard13
Yeah, but what about all that torque steer? Giving a FWD car that much torque would make it almost undrivable.
Nope, I expect close to a 30-40 HP bump and a 50 lb/ft. bump. Can't get too far into the TL's territory, either.
Nope, I expect close to a 30-40 HP bump and a 50 lb/ft. bump. Can't get too far into the TL's territory, either.
The TL is one of the main reasons I don't think that an awd turbo type s will do so well.
sure most people here would love to have a turbo awd tsx. but unfortunately we make up a small portion of the people who buy these cars.
the rest of the people who are looking at these cars will be comparing a type s to the TL. and if the tsx type s is priced close to 35k. people will opt for the TL or TL type s. because the TL is bigger, has a more comfortable ride, upgrades over the tsx and will probably get better gas mileage with more power.
it's esentially what happened to the rdx. people went in looking at it as a smaller suv to get a little better gas mileage. then they drove it and compared it to the mdx. for about 10k more they got a bigger vehicle with more/better options, and virtually identical gas mileage. expect to see the same when comparing a tsx type s to a tl with a closer price point.
#262
Originally Posted by dom
The MazdaSpeed 3's 2.3L Turbo.
Horsepower (hp @ rpm): 263 @ 5500
Torque (lb-ft @ rpm): 280 @ 3000
Not that high revving at all. 280 lb-ft @ 3000 would be nice.
Horsepower (hp @ rpm): 263 @ 5500
Torque (lb-ft @ rpm): 280 @ 3000
Not that high revving at all. 280 lb-ft @ 3000 would be nice.
That would be nice indeed. But the gas mileage would get robbed somewhat.
#263
Burning Brakes
Originally Posted by Nogard13
Nope, I expect close to a 30-40 HP bump and a 50 lb/ft. bump. Can't get too far into the TL's territory, either.
In some cases the same engine is shared across almost the entire product line, although some of those models are not available in the states.
A prime example is the 3 liter engine for BMW. It is available in one version or another from the 1 Series up to the 7 Series.
#264
Originally Posted by gftgrill
it would be sh-awd not fwd. so the increase in torque will be fine.
The TL is one of the main reasons I don't think that an awd turbo type s will do so well.
The TL is one of the main reasons I don't think that an awd turbo type s will do so well.
The "usual" TL/TSX buyers will look at the base models, and the "enthusiast" crowd will now have an additional option. Who knows, we might even win over a few STi/lancer/Legacy GT owners. It's a win-win for the buyer really.
#265
Racer
Originally Posted by 5thTo2nd
But don't forget that the turbo Type S will not necessarily have to do well as long as the TSX lineup as a whole performs well. They may only end up selling a small percentage of Type S's, but that's probably what Acura intends anyways. It's all about pleasing the most people possible, and I applaud Acura for trying to widen their market by attempting to go after this smaller group of buyers.
The "usual" TL/TSX buyers will look at the base models, and the "enthusiast" crowd will now have an additional option. Who knows, we might even win over a few STi/lancer/Legacy GT owners. It's a win-win for the buyer really.
The "usual" TL/TSX buyers will look at the base models, and the "enthusiast" crowd will now have an additional option. Who knows, we might even win over a few STi/lancer/Legacy GT owners. It's a win-win for the buyer really.
#267
Originally Posted by Nogard13
Can't get too far into the TL's territory, either.
#268
Senior Moderator
Originally Posted by Roffles
Well let's just hope Honda stops tiering their cars this way. They should offer different engine options for the TL to keep the cars seperate. Believe me, there are plenty of people who could easily afford a BMW M5, but chose the M3 instead because its unique sporting attributes. It's "two different audiences for two different cars" and not "wealthy people and poor people buying expensive cars and less expensive cars". Hopefully Acura will get the big picture and stop segmenting their cars based on a power/size ratio. GIVE PEOPLE OPTIONS and price accordingly!!!
![Werd](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/smilies/werd.gif)
#269
E92
Originally Posted by Roffles
Well let's just hope Honda stops tiering their cars this way. They should offer different engine options for the TL to keep the cars seperate. Believe me, there are plenty of people who could easily afford a BMW M5, but chose the M3 instead because its unique sporting attributes. It's "two different audiences for two different cars" and not "wealthy people and poor people buying expensive cars and less expensive cars". Hopefully Acura will get the big picture and stop segmenting their cars based on a power/size ratio. GIVE PEOPLE OPTIONS and price accordingly!!!
#270
Originally Posted by TommySalami
Exactly. They need to make every car the best it can be, regardless of whether it may compete with some other car in their line....
For example, the TSX was introduced in early 2003 -- as a 2004 model -- and then got a makeover and significant power bump (roughly 10%) in 2006.
So, whatever is coming out in 2009, they'll be leaving room for some growth.
#271
Originally Posted by rb1
One thing that can't be overlooked is that Honda will also plan to upgrade the car during it's model lifetime, which means that they definitely aren't going to put everything they have into the first year.
For example, the TSX was introduced in early 2003 -- as a 2004 model -- and then got a makeover and significant power bump (roughly 10%) in 2006.
So, whatever is coming out in 2009, they'll be leaving room for some growth.
For example, the TSX was introduced in early 2003 -- as a 2004 model -- and then got a makeover and significant power bump (roughly 10%) in 2006.
So, whatever is coming out in 2009, they'll be leaving room for some growth.
#272
Three Wheelin'
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Philadelphia Burbs
Age: 41
Posts: 1,727
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Nogard13
Huh? The hp numbers jumped from 200 to 205. That's only a 2.5% bump, not a 10% bump.
#273
Senior Moderator
Originally Posted by Nogard13
Huh? The hp numbers jumped from 200 to 205. That's only a 2.5% bump, not a 10% bump.
#274
2009 TSX Deliveries Beginning in March 2008?
Originally Posted by Accordex06PR, from driveaccord.net
Acura TSX 2009 will hit dealers in March 2008!!!
We recently receive allocation for the new 2009 Acura TSX 2009 that will be arrived in March of 2009.
260HP 2.3L Turbo confirmed!!!
BTW, Im a sales manager in a Acura dealership in Puerto Rico!!!
We recently receive allocation for the new 2009 Acura TSX 2009 that will be arrived in March of 2009.
260HP 2.3L Turbo confirmed!!!
BTW, Im a sales manager in a Acura dealership in Puerto Rico!!!
![Wish](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/smilies/wish.gif)
#277
Safety Car
![Lightbulb](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/icons/icon3.gif)
Rumor has it that the next TL will be over 300 hp so a 260hp TSX would not really overlap ... however, no telling what this means for the RL in terms of HP.
#278
I don't that if the new TSX is a 260 hp 2.3l turbo, it will eat into any TL sales. The TL is a much larger vehicle and the TSX is much more smaller and compact, even the base engine TL has 258 hp already, but the engines are irrelevant if the buyer is looking for different classes of vehicles. The TL even has technologies the TSX doesn't have.
#279
E92
Originally Posted by TSX69
Rumor has it that the next TL will be over 300 hp so a 260hp TSX would not really overlap ... however, no telling what this means for the RL in terms of HP.