Can someone please post closeup pics (or a link to pics) of the A-Spec sport steering wheel, and maybe another pic of the stock steering wheel for comparison?

Thanks!

 

check out qatar's(member here) profile and see if he has the link to his gallery.

 

This was ever one of my avatar... Gallery is gone, for now...

 

First of all, thanks adam209 provides this info to host pics.


Original




A-Spec's (I got it one of member, sorry, I forgot your name)




A-Spec steering wheel (Acura posted it in Sep.)

 

The A-spec steering wheel is very nice. Is it thicker? It looks like it is thicker than the regular wheel. I think they could have made it look more different from the regular wheel bye making it a three spoke thus differentiating it more for A-spec owners.

 

Very slight difference. It would be nicer to have some A-Spec badging on it

 

so what is that material where the thumbs go? is it different leather?
is that the only difference from the stock wheel?

 

Don't know what it is, but it's the only difference.

 

the only difference is the handgrip leather is silver and blue stitching all around. everything else is the same. (trust me, i had it )

 

Do they actually replace the steering wheel, or is this simply a cover??

 

The steering wheel is replaced.

 

Why do the even bother using a different steering wheel?

That A-spec package is a far cry from being "right." The steering wheel is nearly identical and I'd have no use for the tack-on "aero" parts.

That leaves the shocks, springs, wheel and tires, all of which should be part of a FACTORY/RPO "performance handling group" that would retails for ~ $1,800.

And truthfully, I feel that that the stock wheels/tires ($200 performance option) are fine for the TL's mission.

That leaves the shocks and the springs, which cost little to nothing more to manufacture than the OEM stuff that comes on the car.

 

Of course you would have no use for the aero parts, as they are only for TLs

And what do you mean by $200 performance option for the stock wheels/tires?

 

"...tack-on "aero" parts..."

Hang on now. This isn't a kit out of the JC Whitney catalog. The TL aero kit has been wind tunnel tested and does reduce both drag and lift. You may not like the styling or you may not think the improvement in drag and lift is worth the expense, but I don't think it's fair to characterize well engineered parts that produce a quantifiable improvement as tack-on "aero" parts. Considering that the aftermarket cranks out kit after kit of hideous tack-on aero junk, I find it really refreshing that Honda put effort into developing a tasteful package that is actually, you won't believe this, ...functional.

I know, you want to see the data:

http://www.autoweek.com/search/searc...00726&record=1

 

I was referring to the $200 high performance tire option that Acura (the factory) offers on 6 speed models.

Those tires, plus the stock 17" rims are fully adequate for the TL.

I wouldn't want/need/be willing to pay for "bigger."

And I wouldn't want/need/be willing to pay for the "aero parts" that are included with the A-spec package.

That's all junk. All I'd have any use for are the springs and shocks, and they should come on the car to begin with (at least as a low cost factory option.)

 

The deck lid spoiler (not the wing) would reduce drag and add rear downforce BY ITSELF!

And I've seen decklid spoilers on TLs that are NOT A-spec equipped.

Remember, all that junk also ADDS WEIGHT. The article you showed me fails to mention that.

And the small aero gains would not be perceptible at anything resembling street legal speeds.

 

"And the small aero gains would not be perceptible at anything resembling street legal speeds."

Sounds like ram air, but one of those threads is enough

I have the aero kit, with the decklid spoiler, on my TL. The appearance improvement is perceptable at all speeds. Why did I get it? Basically, the car I test drove had it, I liked it, I said "I want that car", and I drove it home two hours later. No mental gymanstics or over-examination. As far as weight goes, I add more unnecessary weight (in the form of blubber) to my TL than the aero parts. Seriously, the parts are ABS plastic and probably weigh less than 30 lbs - not enough to notice at street legal speeds.

 

The TINY numbers they mentioned in that article WILL NOT be perceptible into one gets well into triple digits.

Regarding weight: Consider how much effort Acura went through just to get rid of a few pounds for their "Zinardi" edition of the NSX a few years back...

The "faster" a car looks the slower one must drive it if one wishes to keep ones license.

And trust me, I learned that one THE HARD way back in 1986...

My cars have been sleepers (at least relative to their performance potential) ever since.

The A-spec wheel/tire combo adds a few MORE pounds as well....

The single biggest improvement you can make to that car (and many other) in terms of reducing drag while adding some positive downforce is a small decklid spoiler that will be all but invisible to our friends in law enforcement.

Anything beyond that is counter-productive in terms of going fast - on the street.

 

I don't believe weight would be a difference the only additions are the spoiler and side runners.

As far as from a performance stand point motortrend did compare the TL to the TL A-spec.

http://www.motortrend.com/features/p...er/index1.html

As you can see from the finally #'s there is a definite difference. Yes the suspenision is probably the main factor, but the aero package does have some effects.

And maybe it WILL keep the kids out of the JC Whitney catalog.

 

Yeah...the aero package (and larger tires/wheels) SLOWED THE CAR DOWN! Compare the TRAP SPEEDS! The stock example was FASTER!

2004 TL: 98.17 MPH

2004 TL A-SPEC: 97.81 MPH

ALL of the "handling" (and braking) related figure are DIRECTLY attributable to the suspension changes and the larger wheels and tires.

That aero crap would do N-O-T-H-I-N-G on a skidpad or through a slalom. And I do mean N-O-T-H-I-N-G!

 

Didn't notice the speed, good catch.

Can't the suspension be upgraded without the rest of the A-spec additions? I should call the dealer and ask. The suspension upgrade should clear up any remnants of torgue steer and under steer too.

 

Nope.

A-spec parts come ONLY in the full kit.

Trust me, I was ready to buy a TL...Then I looked into the whole A-Spec gimmick (and the OUTRAGEOUS cost) and said "screw it" to the whole idea.

I leased an Accord EX/V6 and kept my LS1 powered Z28 instead.

 

hmmm accord? how could you?...what you doing here then hard? jk bro...PEACE hehehe

but its funny how you ended up not buying the TL just coz of the whole A-spec gimmick? hmmmmmmm again

 

"2004 TL: 98.17 MPH, 2004 TL A-SPEC: 97.81 MPH" Come on now. I've read enough of your posts to know that you understand when something is statistically insignificant - especially when we are talking numbers from Motor Trend - different cars, maybe different drivers, maybe different days.

There's always something with you.

1le: Aero kit is useless.
A: No, it reduces drag and increases downforce.
1le: Well, the downforce is mostly due to the decklid spoiler.
A: You base that on...? Undercar air management is insignificant?
1le: That doesn't matter. The aero kit is useless at street legal speeds.
A: I'm not a Honda engineer, so I don't know what speed it begins to show benefits, but Honda did pay a lot of attention to undercar flow dynamics - probably with street-legal speeds in mind. Of course, those mean old men in Acura's marketing department could be advertising that the kit has capability that I'll never be able to realize. But hey, even if that's the case, the kit sure does look great!
1le: Your gonna learn the hard way. You'll be a ticket magnet. Just you wait.
A: Give me a break, bub. I'm a responsible father of four and haven't been pulled over for anything in nearly ten years.
1le: Yeah, well that aero crap will do nothing for skidpad and slalom numbers.
A: Fine, I usually don't encounter skidpads and slaloms on my way home from work.

Have fun in your sleepers. I'm tired of focusing exclusively on function - which is exactly why I own a TL.

 

LARGER TIRES (with wider cross sections) increase both rolling resistance AND frontal area (which adds DRAG).

I actually FELT the difference in the two (low powered) 4 cylinder Toyota trucks I had (summer rubber was FATTER, but no larger in diameter, than the winter rubber).

That "aero crap" does NOTHING other than make the car resemble a circus wagon and put cash into the pockets of both Acura and their dealerships.

Anyone looking for A REAL (albiet small) gain in aero efficiency for that (and many other) car(s) would be best served by installing a small lip spoiler at the furthest aft point of the trunk lid.

Neither the fact that your a father nor the number of children you have are of any significance whatsoever to this topic.

 

About the only thing one can conclude from your posts in this thread is that you don't like aero crap. Got it. How about some facts. Dropping drag on the TL by .1 is worth about 2hp at 100mph and about 5 hp at 150mph. That's difference in drag load. There are plenty of calculations and rules of thumb for this. Here's one:

.000007 X CD X frontal area (ft2) X speed^3 (speed in mph cubed) = drag load (hp)

If you're going to get the groceries, it doesn't do squat for you. If you're thinking about running the Silver State Classic during your next vacation, 2 to 5 hp less aero drag is going to help out.

The bottom line here is that it is a well though out package that primarily provides appearance benefits. The weight added will have negligible impact on low speed performance, and there are high-speed benefits.

Wow, a factory engineered add-on that many people think looks great and that actually delivers a modest performance improvement. In the world of aero kits, not many are both tasteful and functional.

BTW, stating that I am a responsible individual and not a baggy pants wearing punk is relevent when you begin introducing condescending crap like "The "faster" a car looks the slower one must drive it if one wishes to keep ones license. And trust me, I learned that one THE HARD way back in 1986..."

 

The drag doesn't drop by ".1" It drops by .01. And I suspect that ALL of that it attributable to (or could be matched by) the simple deck lid spoiler...A good deck lid spoiler is very efficient at both reducing drag AND creating positive downforce.

Wide wheels and tires increase frontal area. You didn't mention that. That alone will cancel out any claimed gains in drag coefficient when you run both through the formula you posted above.

Then there's the added rolling resistance from the fatter tires, which you also failed to mention.

The REAL "bottom line" is that the regular TL, fitted with nothing other than the $200 factory tire option (6 speed only), rear deck-lid spoiler and the A-spec springs and shocks would be AT LEAST as effective on the street - all things considered - for far less money.

 

Yep, .1 is a typo - .01 was used to calculate. I'm using same wheels/tires for the comparison. I have the stock 17" wheels. I think we both agree that the stock wheel/tire size is quite good. In fact, a few years ago a 235/45/17 setup was unheard of from the factory. I consider it quite aggressive - especially for a luxury sedan. In fact, the whole 6MT suspension setup is very good and I'd be really reluctant to change anything.

I didn't neglect frontal area changes. I think the increase in frontal area provided by the Acura piece is negligible. It is very modest - the whole kit is. I really don't know a way to measure this, but I've looked at them side by side and there isn't much difference. In the front, it does not drop below the existing air spoiler under the bumber. It does come down a bit at the sides but this is in front of the tires - looks like to provide more air deflection from the front tires. Another point to consider is that when I look at all the detail that went into under car aero, I would be incredibly surprised if Honda came out with a kit that counteracted all that effort. These are the reasons why I think that function had more influence than would normally found in a kit like this. I'm not a circus wagon or wing fan, but I really like how this car looks with the kit. It does not look like an "add-on". There are enough pictures floating around for people to decide for themselves.

But what the heck - no sense arguing. I like it and have it, you don't like don't have to get it.

 

Here's a neat little site I found for playing with aero drag numbers. There are a couple of good calculators here. http://www.davewin.com/tech/horsepower_calc.shtml

I don't have an accurate frontal area number for the TL, but using 24ft2, 3700lb, and .28 CD, the math shows the TL is drag limited at about 175mph. I think drive train losses have to be accounted for, so it may work out lower. It would be interesting to see what it could do without the limiter and with a raised fuel cutoff - under controlled conditions, of course.

 

175 sounds AWFULLY fast for that car.

The Z06 Corvette was DRAG LIMITED to less than that and it produced 405 HP and had a significantly smaller frontal area...

http://www.chevrolet.com/corvette/mu...validation.htm

"Starting with a full tank of gas, the car is driven flat-out at its top speed of 171 mph until the tank is empty — or around thirty minutes."

My '95 SHO was "reasonable" in terms of aerodynamics; that essentially ran into a brick wall @ ~ 135 MPH...with 220 HP.

 

The TL only has ~ 230 HP @ its disposal (@ the drive wheels).

You're not taking road friction (rolling tires, axles, bearings) into account, either....

That car wouldn't touch 175 MPH in stock condition, regardless of whether or not the limiter is left in place.

 

Just for a realistic example:

I had the stockies (17" rims) on my TL about 500 miles ago ... and after adding the 18" Aspec rims .. there is definitely a little less off the line snap .. however, there is much improved handling. IT's a trade-off for sure.

The automatic will reveal the added weight of the wheels more likely than the 6-spd will....

 

As I'm sure you're aware, the broader definition of "handling" consists of a LOT more than skidpad grip and intitial turn-in quickness/transient response.

But I'm glad you agree that the car has "less snap." It does; larger wheels/tires only become "negligable" on cars with big HP and Torque...

I can even feel a SLIGHT difference in rolling resistance in my LS1 Z28 when switching back/forth between the 245 and 215 width tires (which essentially have the same rolling diameter) and that's just a 30 mm difference in width!

 

Yep, that does seem more than hopeful. I had a feeling something wasn't right. FWHP is probably the right number to work with. TOV got 222hp recently. Use that and the calculation drops to 163. Throw in some more intangibles and it looks like there probably isn't much past the current limiter - not without a lot more power. But hey, 150 or so is nothing to sneeze at.

Your rolling resistance experiences also jive with old drag racing knowledge - skinnies up front definitely shaved time. I guess that would be the back in this case...

 

It amazes me how people so often overlook the tradeoffs that are associated with bigger/wider rubber - particularly in vehicles that are light in low end torque/HP.

I think CAR AND DRIVER managed 152 MPH in their 6 speed TL test car; that's damn impressive, all things considered.