I like how this thread has turned into a debate on oil consumption.

First point.. the TSX is no where close to the TL... the only similarities are that its based off the same platform, and the front looks like a 'nicer' TL.

As far as HP...

The horsepower war started about 5 years ago, when Nissan decided to introduce their 3.5L V6 w/ 250+ hp Maxima/Altima/Pathfinder

All of Toyota's lines were ranged sub-200hp, with the Supra leading the pack. w/ their 3.0 liter V6 topping out at 220-225 HP N/A. w/ the exception of the Lexus Line.

Of the big 3 japanese... Toyota/Lexus was the only manufacturer to offer a proven V8 in their line up with the 260HP 4.0 V8 in the LS 400/SC400 later increased to 290/300HP.

Nissan was and may possibly still be the king of the V6 w/ Honda a close 2nd. Getting the most out of their V6's has been the name of game. although their V8 in their Titan, Xterra is a strong competitor now.

Honda/Acura soon followed w/ the TL Type-S w/ 260HP, and in recent years increased their Accord V6 line to 240HP from 200HP. w/ the exception of the CRV, Element, and Civic, all the other models now offer 200HP or higher - Not bad for a company who has mastered the V4 engine. the S2000 is a remarkable piece of engineering squeezing 240HP out of a 2.0/2.2 liter 4 cylinder.

The Japanese have had to follow the market which demanded increased power from everyone. On the contrary the Domestic market has not listened and the big 3 domestics have not followed this trend. Most of the same class V4's and V6's are still weak w/ old technology.

You cannot compare Chrysler, Ford, and GM who have made strides in recent years w/ their SRT and SVT divisions w/ the refinement of Honda/Acura. The returning trend of muscle cars is what is fueling Chrysler, Ford, and Chevy's attention to HP.

Chrysler's HP flagships - Neon SRT-4, Viper SRT-10, Ram SRT-10, Hemi Magnum/Charger/300M

Ford's HP flagships - Mustang GT, Cobra SVT, Focus SVT, F150 Lightning SVT

GM's HP flagships - Corvette, Pontiac GTO, Caddy CTS/V-series

w/ the exception of the SRT-4 all of these cars have V-8's or larger, and are supercharged in some cases to give them the huge HP gains. The larger blocks will naturally give them more torque.

the Germans will always have their BMW M3/M5, AMG '55' series,

With the EPA cracking down, Nissan, Mitsubishi, and Toyota all discontinued their twin turbo configurations (i.e. 300Z TT, Supra TT, and 3000GT VR-4 TT). Who knows where the HP race would be if the V6 TT configuration were allowed again.

I seem to be rambling, however, my basic point is that the Japanese have been engaged in a HP war for a while now... one that even the German's have not followed suit in, and until very recently, a war that the domestics have almost ignored.

 

You're right, jennarocks. We swerved off course big time, but I'll stop going on about the oil thing. It's just one of my peeves ...

 

V4

 

I'm out of the market for 7-10 years.. So regardless of whatever comes out, I'll love my 05 TL.. Hmm.. Wonder what a 2015 TL will be like..

 

Jennarocks

You are correct with the hp war issue. Nissan did throw their hat in rink and Honda did follow but not with a larger motor. Under the old rating the 3.0 put out 240 hp compaire to the VQ's 240 in the Altima. Only the VQ's torque was higher as could be expected.

Toyota said at one time they would not enter the hp war, well the new Avalon puts out a healthly dose and it remains to be seen what the new Camry will produce hp wise since I guess the 3.0 is out and either the 3.3 or 3.5 is in.

The only way the TSX can compete with the TL would be if a V6 were offered but a V will not fit under the hood.

And as someone has stated before, the TSX is smaller and not as roomy.

 

True the TSX is smaller and not as roomy...
But thats why the TSX handles better.
The TL and TSX are two worlds apart.

 

It does indeed handle better then my TL as it's balance is just right. Now if Acura would put that rumored turbo 4 under the hood and market it as a performance model!!!!

 

Well IMO Honda needs to ditch the crap stock Michelin 215 tires with some nice 235's and 17x8 wheels, and give the TSX a proper rear swaybar thats 22"s instead of 15.

Those two factors really hinder the TSX's capabilities. If you give the TSX a thicker sway to make it neutral with tires that actually grip then it would be even more stellar.

 

The TSX could use extra power of course but... I don't know if I want that power from a turbo. I think Honda's doing the right thing. I mean I want a reliable 4 cylinder car thats fuel efficient while also exciting to drive packed with amenties... and to me it has sufficent enough power to go through the bends. Now if I wanted a mid-range luxury car with power, thats the role the TL plays.

 

The minute the lousy tires on my TL needed replaced, I did so with kumo ECSTZ ASX 245/45 95W Ultra high performance All Seasons.

Talk about night and day in handling.

Honda has NEVER been good at choosing tires or fitting their cars stronger breaks.

 

From what has been written else where, the turbo program is back on (for the RDX for all anyone outsider knows) as Honda has worked out the reliability and fuel efficiency issues.

If, if Acura were to turbo charge the TSX then it should/needs to be on an optional modle as I've read other's say they wouldn't want a turbo for various reasons.

 

I understand you and true Hondaphiles probably prefer to go the NA route. But having a turbocharger will not make the TSX any less reliable and I'm certain Honda (of all the manufacturers) would make certain of that, although I agree that fuel economy would suffer a bit.

Personally, the TSX's K24A could benefit from a small turbocharger (i.e.: Garrett T25) running mild boost (5-7psi) AND provide for some solid footing in the tuner aftermarket. While the added hp would make the TSX a more attractive proposition, it could benefit nicely with an add'l 20-30lb-ft of torque as well.

 

When will everyone realize that cars are like PC's -- there are always going to be newer, better one's with more features for lower prices. Can't we just be happy with what we have? If you always have to have the "best" car, it's gonna get pretty expensive in the long run. After all, it does just take you from one location to another...

 

Yeah, but my TL sure does get me to "point B" with a lot more style, comfort, and fun than my Maxima!

 

Thank you; I was wondering what Mike_TX was smoking. He said himself that China's demand is up, and so it is in the US. So if China's demand and US demand is *up*, how can the oil companies be selling LESS? Just doesn't make sense. Back on topic, I think the Accord is closing the gap, and it's a little harder to justify the upgrade from it to the TL, except for styling. One would wonder why a buyer would get the TSX instead of a loaded Accord, tho.

 

While car shopping with a friend who was looking at the tsx, I came across my 05 tl.
I had seen them before, but thought that they were too large ( coming frrom a v-dub bug i guess any car would be) but the color ( desert mist) really drew me in. aside from returning it to have an o-ring affecting the a/c fixed, it has been a dream. I hope the gas mileage goes up with age, but other than that mo complaints. I live in alaska and they are not as popular as the A4 quattros and 3series XIs are here and I wondered if they are more popular in other parts of the country?

 

TLtrance,

"What is the price difference between 87 and 93/94?"

The difference around here can be as much as 35 cents per gallon.

"Getting higher than 91 will NOT adversely affect you one bit, but getting lower definitely can."

I'm aware of this and I agree. The higher the octane, the less volitile the fuel. The lower the octane, the more volitile. Using a higher octane than what is REQUIRED is nothing but a waste of money as it will never add power nor will it aid in fuel economy. I have to used 93 octane or higher on my 1995 Supercharged 4.6L V-8 T-Bird. It was dyno tuned for 93 Exxon and that's all it ever sees. Using 87 octane in that car would be BAD.

AcuraTL44,

"Actually, the TL does have speed sensing wipers. They are only like this in "intermitting mode"

Yes, I noticed that. However I would like them to change it for all modes and have the ability to turn the feature on and off. It wouldn't be a big deal to do it. It's only software.

The radio volume adjustment feature is becoming standard on more and more makes. The Pontiac G6 has it and the car is $10,000 cheaper than the TL.

Ok two good things the TL has that the TSX doesn't. The 8-track tape deck (oops, I mean cassette tape) and the passenger side auto window.

A-Train

 

Because the TSX is a sports sedan built of higher quality with better predicted reliability.

 

derf: Man, whatever floats your boat. I for one do not look for things to get me depressed.

I would say that 95% of what I see on the "why doesn't the TL have XXHHHFF?" are things I could care less about, and would not want to pay a base price of $1000-3000 more to get. No way. In fact, I would like to de-content the TL in some areas, and add more "go rather than show" things. Bling-Bling can do life in Sing Sing as far as I am concerned. But that's me. Wipers, blow-dry butt cheeks, whether the side marker lights blink, and so forth are just tweako items in my opinion. I'd rather have a LSD than any 10 "living room" items anyday.

************************************************** *********************
mickey3c: You seem to ignore the development cycles of cars in your post - Acura should have a V8 - the slow sales of the RL demonstrate that. Who would have foreseen the higher oil prices of todsay even...well, last year? - Let alone 3 years or more ago when the RL, TL, and Accord were in their final development phase of the product lifecycle?
************************************************** *********************

Mike_Tx: Of course the oil companies are making a bundle right now - they just posted quarterly profits - this is not even arguable.
************************************************** *********************
Others:

However, gas is still cheaper than it was in 1981 when cost adjusted, and no one seems to be all up in arms when oil prices drop - there are no Congressional inquiries, accusations of price fixing, etc.

As to the blame game - China? India? Puh-leez? Blame yourselves (us). The American public has had its head in the sand about much bigger energy issues for years:
1) Nuclear - we are still thinking America could have a China Syndrome or Chernobyl
2) Offshore drilling - plenty of oil/natural gas - we are letting other nations clean our clock because every once in a while, a baby seal gets slimy.
3) ANWAR - can you say Spotten Owl?
4) Unncessarily complicated goct. paperwork for any kind of energy exploration. I believe in reasonable safety and environmental Law, but unless you lean way over to starboard, it is obvious that US industry is shackled compared to the rest of the World by prohibitive rules. One indemnifies industry for most hazards forever - but when the govt itself screws up (MTBE anyone), the cost of thast screwup lands on the mfr and is passed on to - guess who? you and I. Plus, the mfr is not indemnified against MTBE litigation either.

With deployment of nuclear, the huge gas and oil reserves in our Nation, we would nopt have our domestic ballz in a vise, while we would be putting $'s back where they do the mopst good - in re-investment and domestic jobs, and the payment of taxes. The Free Market works - govt attempts to run that FM genberally do not.

 

man this person has to quote the gas being cheaper than in 81. What a F-n nob... Sure do you remember 81 and how bad it was double digit inflation and 19% mortgages. ??? I was there and saw it first hand. That's what they want you to believe since you are being remeemed over night with the prices going up 50% since the beginning of the year. Any other industry did that you would be called a crook!!! yeah and they claim that it is because of other issues... Well there are people making a fortune. my oil stocks when up 58% this year so far.

As for development cycles, you are seeing it happen now. The big v8s are going to sit on the market as the companies that produce the smaller luxury cars will end up with the market. I work in engineering and if you are dumb enough to believe it takes at least 2 years to react to something then you better get used to being out of work.

I think there might be fewer people buying luxury models when you need 3000 bucks to heat your homes and 3000 a year in gas (for one car). Who cares who is too blame. You all knew when you bought those huges SUVs what was happening.. right.

 

Geez, take a valium, mommy's little helper, you'll feel better. One might think that your gains in oil securities might temper you obvious contempt for the current oil market. Not many like high gas prices but there's no need hose everyone here with personal attacks in what was once a friendly conversation. Clearly you must feel inadequate in some other area of your life because I can't see how this response could be caused by this thread.

 

You guyz play nice. Daddy's home.

Mickey: turn on your Private Messages unless you want a public note from me.

:wink: