Skeedatl

I just got the new C&D (p132 May issue) where they have a short write up on the TL. They pulled a .9g from their A-Spec while the previous test of the non-ASpec 6MT they had they got a .89. Suspension wise, doesn't seem that big of an improvement to me but they didn't have any slalom numbers.

They did pull a 14.30 1/4 and 5.6s 0-60 from the A-Spec.

But alas, they almost made it through the article without complaining about torque steer...but they managed to get it in the 2nd to the last article.

Their summary...they neither recommend for it or against it.

TLover

BAH! Screw C&D. I like the 0-60 and 1/4 mile times they got though. What they should have done is have track times. Personally, I think the A-Spec is overrated for the money.

PetesTL

This only reaffirms my opinion that Acura should have used that $5200 and made a new Type-S with it (more hp or AWD). For some car brands, five grand+ means the difference between a V-6 and a V-8.

Aegir

Sounds like conditions weren't the same so a fair comparison cannot be made. They state in the article that 'cold weather' affected braking performance compared to the previously tested 6MT. That helps explain the great acceleration numbers. Cold weather would affect skidpad performance as well - especially with the ES100s. Typical C&D methodology. They suck at this and their numbers are frequently inconsistent. For example, I wonder how they got 5-60 times slower than 0-60?

I would like to see track times. Run it against a regular 6MT. Hell, run it against a 330i and a G35 too. If C&D is going to say that A-spec improvements are only subjective, then they should have some more substantial data to back it up than skidpad numbers where environmental conditions did not match.

PeterUbers

iTrader: (1)

I'm just glad you can buy certain parts of the A-spec kit w/o having to buy it all .. i.e. i loved the rims, didn't like the tires, liked the front underspoiler, but not the rest of the kit. I didn't want the brakes, the suspension, or the steering wheel ..

speedyturtle_RENAMED

0-60 times are generally faster because it allows dropping the clutch/brake torquing to obtain the optimal launch while 5-60 means that they floor the car moving very slowly from a very low RPM.

moregrip

FYI, I dont think many people are paying full pop for the A-spec anymore

My full bill with Body Side moldings was 4434.57.

Aegir

Makes sense. Thanks.

lakeman

It has been said before, but skid pad mostly tests the tires. As long as a car doesn''t have much body roll (which neither the 6MT or ASPEC do) it basically is a test of the tire and weather conditions. Others who have tested the ASPEC have noted much better turn in and composure.
For a more balanced write up, read the Edmunds full test of the TL. It noted the 6MT had one of the fastest slaloms ever recorded. This is a better measure of handling, but a track run in a comparison test is what I am looking for to see how good the TL (6MT/ASPEC) really is. IMHO I think the TL will do very well against any of it's competitors.

DMZ

I agree 100%. There's a lot of things I can buy for 5 grand other than a set of springs, shocks, tires, wheels, and of course, that little chrome badgie on my trunkie. And I would never install that big rear spoiler on the trunk lid considering how much it affects the rear vision.

But I do think that if you really want the A-SPEC option, it should come from the factory whereby you don't have to pay for the components that get discarded when the kit's installed.

neuronbob

I agree with DMZ in that A-Spec should be factory, rather than dealer-installed. I think Acura does it this way to make it a profit center for the dealers.

As I just posted in another thread, Konis + Comptech springs $$ < A-spec $$$$.