SSFTSX

I have also driven MDX loaner. It is nowhere near to Q5. Infact Q5 is considered above RX350 2010 in driver comfort. Q5 has quite similar fuel economic like Acura RL/TL-SHAWD. about 18mpg in tests. Similar accelaration upto 100mph. All lthe electronics gizmos (drive select) of A4 with V6 refinement. It is univeral bench mark in SUVs. All his in vehicle only 182inch long with class leading wheelbase. It is very compact from outside and spacious.
No one wants to drive gaz guzzler 192 inch MDX or 195inch TL.



http://www.caranddriver.com/var/ezfl...470fab3ecc.pdf
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...c60/specs.html

Legend2TL

A Q5 is rated 18/23 EPA rated
A MDX is 17/22 EPA rated

You calling a MDX a gas guzzler also makes the Q5 a hungry gas guzzler also.

the MDX has twice the cargo volume of the Q5 and seats 7 to Q5's 5 passenger sitting. Most of our neighbors with 1G and 2G MDX's use their third row seats at least a few times a years to get more than 5 into the vehicle. I'd agree it's for children and not long trips but still a MDX gets better fuel efficiency per capita considering it's passenger seating and volume.

ggesq

iTrader: (1)

This thread is about a 'civil' discussion between the A4 and the TL. Let's keep the MDX and Q5 out of it please.

docboy

Yes, PLEASE!!! Other threads have been closed b/c they get out of topic. Let's keep this one open.

ggesq

iTrader: (1)

^^ I asked politely. I deleted your post. Next off topic post regarding the MDX and Q5 and your gone for a month.

Legend2TL

I pretty much agree with your analysis. I've only looked at the new A4 (inside a shopping mall on display so I could not sit inside but could look). Overall it's styling is very nice.

On the 4G TL, I'd wait for the 6MT. The 5AT is most probably going to be replaced to a 6AT in 2011 (I thought they'd put in a 6AT but Acura only put it in the MDX/ZDX). And a car in that class really should have a 6AT.

I love driving my 6MT 3G TL so if the 4G is similar it should be a entertaining car to drive.

I think the only unknown out of it all is the long term reliability of the Audi, it seems they've improved somewhat the initial reliability.

cp3117

I know it seems a little odd as the majority always look at the HP or TQ numbers to evaluate a vehicles performance. Audi and now BMW have been announcing that they are going to be producing smaller more powerful drivetrains, less weight, etc for their lines in the future.

Audi achieves comparable performance to the much larger TL engine by doing a great job by matching its transmission gearing to their engine in order to get optimal performance and fuel economy from it. This is also how they achieve the same results from their smaller and older/outdated 3.2L engine and how its also been shown to equal or in some cases outperform the much larger 3.7L TL.

When you look at both cars for practical daily driving (as the OP was looking for) the Audi 2.0T has been proven to be a great choice as it has been consistently outperforming or at least equaling its 6cyl competition with its smaller engine.

I am comparing both vehicles at MSRP. Your comparing the Audi at MSRP against the best possible deal for a SHAWD.....of course you can make it look like a better deal if you manipulate the pricing like that.

Actually the best performance results for the 2.0T have come from the tiptronic 6AT as the 6MT has been rarely tested.

This is definitely the TL's weak point with its 5AT. Its nice that Honda is finally coming out with a 6AT after being behind for about 10 years in that area. The future though looks good after seeing the gearing in the 2010 6AT for the MDX and it looks very promising for the TL if it ever sees that tranny and gearing.

As i stated above, how Audi engineered their gearing and matching it to the 2.0T is a great design but I dont understand what you mean by brake torque manipulation? If your referring to how the TL has been tested over the last year that has basically been proven false (IMO) and has been more of an excuse for the TL's disappointing acceleration numbers.

I definitely wouldn't say that the TL is clearly the better candidate as the facts prove otherwise. The area I do agree with though is top end power. This is where the HP difference will come into play and the TL would be the better choice. Having said that though, The A4 and TL a fairly equal for daily driving performance. This difference in top end power will mostly be seen when driving at aprox 90-100+ MPH. The majority of the public dont drive at these speeds on a regular basis but if the OP is Autocrosing his TL (which im sure he isnt) or constantly driving at those speeds then definitely look harder at the TL.

BleuM&M

I didn't feel cramped in the A6, it just seems that the TL has more driving positions I find comfortable.

I had a ton of issues with A6 reliability. As I posted elsewhere, when it wasn't on a hoist or heading there, it was great! I think the usual issues will crop up with the 09 Audi line as consumer miles pile up.

Legend2TL

Potential long term reliability and cost of ownership are IMO the biggest problems facing Audi owners. Some of Audi fans on AZ have said their Audi's have been decent experiences but I'd say wait until CR has some longer term owner data to see how it works out. Audi have great technology, engineering, and design but have yet to demonstrate the long term reliability.

My neighbor's 2006 A8L was similar to your A6, he loved driving his but it spent alot of time getting repaired and awaiting parts. He previously had a 2000 740iL, so he was used to German cars and cost of ownership. His BMW although not perfect was far better than the Audi. He traded the Audi in an Acura.

A co-worker got a A3 wagon in the last year, and so far she's very happy with it and it's been OK (no service except for maintenance).

winstrolvtec

Based mostly on my test drives, but also on the fact that a greater launch can be achieved from the 6MT ultimately making for the best result. My basis is not just from publications, that's a good start but a combination of both is better. Can't simply compare one time to another and expect an honest result, in any case. AT's always add weight and eat up power, modern technology allows them to be almost as fast but it's still triptronic, we are not talking DSG.


My meaning is that you can brake torque the A4 to a degree but you can't in the TL SH, so the #'s will be skewed for the A4 when you are trying to judge passing or pulling power, which is significantly more notable in the TL in addition to the top end performance. That's a lot of power to simply right off as only top end.

How the SH has been tested and if it was done incorrectly may or may not be the case but in any event the fact still remains the TL has shown a variance in tests up to .8 of a sec in the 1/4 mile, that's enough to warrant some suspicion. Regardless the faster times of the SH have been 14.3-14.4 @ 97-99 mph, a far cry from disappointing considering lack of brake torque and 6AT transmission and the A4 has it's fair share of slow times as well but to be fair I always take the fastest times for short comparison.

Now pricing, let's just assume you can get the cars for equal price, equally equipped. The TL is hands down more car for the money. It surpasses in every major area other than mpg, maybe a few tech items which shouldn't justify an entire car purchase in my opinion anyway, but it's mostly trade offs in this department and finally any subjective reasons why you may prefer the A4 but logically the choice is clear. In actuality, the A4 will run you slightly more when equal and discounts can be had on both but mostly in favor of the TL.

Being that comfort/size was a big concern for the OP, don't compare interior volume by measurements, smaller cars are often designed to give better measurement minus the actual usable space. Take the the IS for example, which measures pretty good on paper and look how that turned out.

Legend2TL

Forgot about the comfort requirement, one thing my wife and one of the my two daughters do not like about my 2005 TL 6MT is the harsh ride. I and my other daughter are Ok with it. The 04-06 TL's have higher spring and damping rates, and the 6MT have stiffer roll bars so the suspension is fairly stiff.

There's a introductory article in Edmunds about the 6MT 2010 TL, but they may indicate what they did to the suspension settings so it's best to drive one yourself before putting a deposit down.

jjsC5

I think the A5 (and S5) coupes are gorgeous. I stopped at the Audi dealer today to look at them. I looked several months ago, and today confirmed what I remembered. For all the bragging (by magazines) about their interiors, that is exactly what dissapointed me the most. Frankly, I think the TL interior blows away the Audi.

And for 2010, the A4 either gets you the 4 cylinder turbo, or you have to move up to the S4 with the supercharged engine - for a lot more money. The 3.2 is no longer available in the A4.

The ONLY reason to consider the Audi is because of how ugly the TL is.

hypno999

How can you even compare A4 with new TL SHAWD?
A5 or A6 maybe... A4 is just an entry car with hardly any luxury.

I used to own A6 few years back, nice car but for people over 50 maybe... and I was 28 It was a great car but it wasn't fun to drive as much as the new TL is.

Next car I have my eye on is a new 2010 Mercedes E550 coupe - beauty!!!
http://www.motorauthority.com/conten...30_02-0223.jpg

jjsC5

Well, one of the major mags just picked the Audi over the TL in a comparison test. Why don't you ask them how they can compare the two (can't remember off hand - I think it was Car & Driver).

BTW, a very good friend of mine has a E550 coupe on order for his wife. I'm anxious to drive it. I agree with you on that car!

PsychDoc

I don't know about the 2010 E coupe but C&D just did a five car $50k+ comparo (E350, 535i, Jaguar XF, M45, A6) and the E350 sedan came in dead last. The A6 was the clear winner in this grouping.

PetesTL

The new A4 seems to be selling very well.......I've seen at least one a day now for the past month. In comparison, I rarely see another 4G on the road.....my last one was about 3 weeks ago......and it's the same FWD GM 4G I see over and over.

JD23

Overall, I think the 4G has outsold the B8 A4 by a small margin. In my area, it is completely the opposite of what you've experienced; I just saw my first B8 A4 about a week ago, but I've seen quite a few 4G TLs.

PetesTL

Actually, I'm kinda glad I don't see any 4G's in my area. It makes my car all the more unique. I'm still getting stares everywhere I go. I wish I don't run into another 4G for another year!

cp3117

I totally agree.
I was just referring to you saying that "You need the 2.0 in 6MT to even be compared to the 5AT TL. The quickest recorded publication time for the 2.0T was 5.7s to 60 in a 6AT vs the quickest time for the TL in a 5AT was 5.9s
The 6MT in the Audi will probably be even that much better so the 6AT is more than comparable to the TL. I assume what you meant was probably just a typo.


Actually the best recorded times for the TL where conducted under "Full Brake Torque" (When you check their notes...cant remember if it was C&D or R&T) and also Jeff at TOV completed his tests using some brake torque. I use to believe the brake torque excuse late last year when people where talking about it here but its basically been proven false.

I never use "magazine racing" as the final say in a cars performance but as a general guideline. The A4 has also had some large varying numbers over the last year also but its easy to see that the TL transmission is its weak point.

The TL doesnt surpass the A4 in every major area and this can be seen easily when looking at the facts. Each car has its own merits whether its in performance, size, quality etc. So it may seem to be clear in your opinion and logic but obviously not everyones, as i know many others including myself see the A4 as the better value.

It is true that you may get slightly more of a discount on the TL vs the A4 but that also has to do alot with a premium brand like Acura vs a Tier 1 model such as Audi and being that Audi sales havent plummeted as bad as Acura's (without using heavy incentives) that may have something to say also as to which maybe the better choice IMO.

Yourself and I obviously have different needs in an automobile and view things differently between the two cars and perceive their value differently. This is the same thing the OP has to figure out as to which is a better value to him/herself. Personally as I stated before he should take a serious look at the 2010 Buick Lacrosse.

jjsC5

Yes, I read that. While I don't discount magazines tests, I do try to put their results in the context of how I'm going to use the car versus their parameters. Most of the mags rate the cars based upon peformance (both objective and subjective). They assume that as enthusiasts, that is what we want as well.

But my situation is a perfect example of how we should rate them based upon our intended use. First of all, I have a Z06 Corvette that I run the backroads in. It is a "weekend only" car for me. My daily driver doesn't need to fill that purpose particularly because I mostly drive it in the Houston metro area.

While a responsive chassis and good overall performance are still important for my daily driver, I don't want or need the ultimate performance sedan for my daily driver. I want a little more of a compromise with some emphasis on comfort and features.

Heck, if we were all about the ultimate peformance I'm not sure anyone who buys a Acura could claim it is the best choice. I'll never believe a front drive platform is the ultimate performance car in it's class. It's going to lose out to a G37 or 328 BMW if that is the criteria - and in fact the TL has lost to them in the magazine tests.

winstrolvtec

You do in actuality need the 6MT to compare to the everday drivability and passing/pulling power of the TLS SH 5AT. The A4 2.0 6AT operates on a hidden track mode that is activated when stability is disabled and brake torque is attempted. You can clearly see it is down in power, by the much lower trap speeds it consistantly demonstrates, so what is on paper is a bit manipulating if you expect that level of performance to translate to everyday driving. That's why we see the 2.0 as equal to the 3.2 in testing becuase the 3.2 doesn't brake torque but in reality it is the faster choice of the A4 and to be fair that would be more in line with the TL in this regard.

http://blogs.edmunds.com/strategies/...tmas-list.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEIou77FmHQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGuLxGBmOTc

The link, why not to buy the A4 and how they are lying to you and then real world 0-60 video pulls clearly demonstrating the TL's power advantage. No brake torque in either case and it's not ment to be looked at as a time comparison, just a gauge.

Not the case. Here's the misunderstanding. The TL can be brake torqued, the problem is, just not sucessfully. Most cars with mechanisms in place don't allow it at all, the TL does but undetectably upshifts. So when full brake torque is attempted it upshifts to 2nd gear. The best times came from MT and Jeff at TOV, not C&D or R&T. Now, knowing this I ask you how can anyone say that the best time was acheived while brake torquing?

Quoting Jeff at TOV, "I tried brake torquing it mildly but it seemed to launch about the same as if I just jumped on the throttle after lifting the brake".

https://acurazine.com/forums/4g-tl-performance-parts-modifications-295/wavehoggers-preliminary-dynolicious-sh-awd-performance-results-696921/
http://www.smugmug.com/gallery/65402...23793494_9bzcR

There's the thread about Wavehogger's original findings of the brake torque issue and video proof there is a a large difference in test results similar to the magazine variations. Holding the brake than releasing as you hit the gas does not apply to the term brake torquing, there is no "torquing" taking place. Again, those times may be a result of the issue or maybe not, it really doesn't matter. The important thing is to have the facts in perspective so there is an honest discussion taking place.

What are those facts? What makes the A4 a better value, without the use of anything subjective?

If Audi is Tier 1, what is a Rolls Royce or Bentley? Tier 1 doesn't exist in any Audi or Acura product, I really can't believe how many buy into that sales pitch. As far as sales go, the TL has outsold the A4 consistantly and the discounts have always been in favor of Japanese makes and a discount can now be had at an Audi dealer and that was clearly not the case a few years ago, so everyone is suffering from slow sales. Fact is they pay higher labor and import costs so they have to cleverly come up with ways to get you to think the price is justified. And my local Audi dealer, only two blocks away, even offered me a decent discount on an upcoming S4, which is a fairly limited, on order only, vehicle right now.

Agreed, I think he should take a serious look at everything that applies. I have and for my needs and tastes, which are very similar to the OP's, brings me to the TL SH 6MT.

cp3117

Once again, no you dont need the 6MT. The Edmunds article is interesting but its what they basically stated when they tested the car earlier in the year. I dont understand how its such a big surprise to the assoc. editor, especially whenever they test vehicles they go through all scenarios. (ie; brake torque, no brake torque, VSA on or off, sport modes etc etc. in order to get the best results.

Here is a link to how they test their vehicles.

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...ticleId=130988

Here are two links showing the test sheets for the A4 and TL and remember this is one of the worst performances for the A4 as C&D got a 5.7s 0-60 before for the A4 but they dont have the test sheets posted. (Generally the 2.0T averages low-mid 6s)

http://www.caranddriver.com/var/ezfl...ea7df17336.pdf
http://www.caranddriver.com/var/ezfl...926e9988b3.pdf

Whats very interesting is that while the acceleration numbers are fairly close the 2.0T actually outperforms the TL to 120mph and has better passing/pulling power and is slightly quicker in the 1/4 mile.
Really there is nothing manipulating about the numbers as you say as its simply, lots of torque, lighter car and a better transmission that are making this happen along with why the 2.0T equals the 3.2L (and probably the reason why its being phased out).

The video's are nice entertainment but i dont know how this relates to everyday driving/real world 0-60 when you have the TL in sport mode driven to redline and the A4 driven the same way knowing that maximum perfromance for a FI engine is generally at max boost not past that like in the video. (either way they are still fairly close). Lets also be honest as it took "WaveHogger" many tries to get that result and even he admitted that the 5.54 result was an inaccurate result. Thats a far stretch from everday driving. If you wanted that then both cars should be in "D" with no brake torque etc. That would be more comparable and I would bet the 2.0T would still equal or slightly outperform the TL.....So in reality there is no conspiracy theory or "lying/Misconception" as your trying to make it sound.


The link i posted above on "How IL tests cars" explains how this "Brake Torque" issue for the TL and its related numbers doesnt matter as they test the vehicle in various ways and then post the best result. So while I understand what your saying about the TL and "Brake torquing" (although all TL's may not be the same), it doesnt really matter as they will find the best result anyway.

Here is the fastest time for a TL-SHAWD published by a credible publication.

http://www.caranddriver.com/var/ezfl...1b15b66cd1.pdf

As you can see in the notes it was achieved by using "Full brake Torque". Obviously they didnt get the fastest result by using the "Brake off - Gas on" technique.


Everyone has different perspectives on what makes a vehicle a better value, so im not sure what you use. I guess if you look at the basics though the A4 has better acceleration performance, interior noise levels, fuel consumption, cargo space etc. Both vehicles have trade offs in interior room with the TL having slightly more leg and shoulder room but the A4 with more headroom. The TL does exceed in handling and braking but to be fair with the A4 its never been tested with a sport package and 19" wheels that the TL is always tested with.

Tier 1 is not an official category but still one used in the industry. Tier one doesnt exist in Acura but i find it surprising that you dont think Audi is when the majority of the auto industry does. If it isnt a concern and a "sales pitch" then why are Acura executives so concerned about trying to be at the same level as Audi, MB, BMW and Lexus and openly admit they are not at the same level.

http://www.autoblog.com/2009/02/02/a...ld-be-revived/

Personally I think the TL is a good car but when the price difference between a TL and similar equipped A4 is roughly 1K... (IMHO) the TL is edging toward being overpriced when you look at the facts and take into account quality materials etc....especially when Acura execs. know they arent up to par with Tier one brands like Audi etc.


In the end we are generally debating about a few tenths in performance but when you look at the big picture both cars perform generally the same but the 2.0T is 2cyl and 1.7L smaller than the TL and the A4 has better fuel economy.
I just wanted to provide the facts so that maybe the OP can make an informed decision and if it helps in any way then great.........as you stated above "The important thing is to have the facts in perspective so there is an honest discussion taking place".

winstrolvtec

I am not trying to be rude but maybe you missed the point. You can replicate those kind of results in the TL for real world driving but you can't for the A4. The TL only requires that you put it in sport and shift manually, which is what many do on an everyday basis. The A4 requires that you turn off stability, be at a dead stop and brake torque, not something many people will attempt in real life and the only time you can use it is for the track or street racing, except only from a dead stop. That acceleration result is of no use when merging, passing or pulling in real life. So in the case you can't do this, which is often in everyday driving situations the actual results are consistantly 6.5-6.9 0-60 with a 15.0 1/4 @ 92 to 94 mph, comparable to a 2.4 TSX in reality and in stats.

It's as clear as night and day when you actually get behind the wheel of both of these vehicles and not pointlessly magazine race. With the TL what you see is what you get, not the case for the A4. Most track results have the 2.0 A4 running the above mentioned time and no better. Even with an aggressive track mode and 6AT the A4 is heavy and only makes 211 hp, makes perfect sense considering it's 1/4 mile trap speed. So the faster times are not a product of it's power, it's a product of awd traction and high rpm launch ability, which the 5 AT TL doesn't have, nor the 3.2 A4 or even 2.4 TSX, for comparison. Quote from C&D "When speeds reach 80 mph, the V-6’s superior horsepower helps it to slowly pull away from the four-cylinder, but up to that speed, the two are identical. So the V-6 is certainly more expensive, but it’s not really any quicker than the base engine. (Becuase the 2.0 A4 brake torques and the 3.2 does not)
So through the allowance of this technique the A4 2.0 can match each of these more powerful cars acceleration but only through this method, so it's easy to see which cars are faster from the start. In the event that they could also do this then they would easily outperform on paper. That's why the TL 6MT version will without a doubt outperform the A4 6MT and it's not a knock, just honesty.

My intention was to stress this point not have a pissing match of which is faster down the track or on paper. If you want that result bring both to the track. The videos are not verified in any way and Wave's run is closer to 5.9 but that was not my intent in posting it. For the sake of discussion there is a one second advantage in the TL and it is capable to acheive those times at a much lesser expense in the TL vs the A4. Even had tha Audi been shifted at a more powerful shift point it's not saving you more than .5 a sec and another .5 sec to match will have to come from brake torquing. If any A4 owner thinks they are going to come close to the C&D time of 5.7, know that you will have to full brake torque at the highest rpm possible and just how many are willing to do that? In the TL, put it in sport and shift at redline, no harm done, convenient and actually usable.

No, that's not the fastest time for the TL SH 5AT. The fastest time is from Motortrend and it's 14.4 at 99 mph. I see what you are saying but the TL will shift into 2nd gear under brake torque and it's a fact it hurts acceleration by at least .5 sec, therefore if C&D did so then that means the TL was tested incorrectly and could have run better, regardless if they were able to do so or not. Jeff at TOV also ran 97 mph but got a 14.3 instead, there is your .5 sec lost in upshift. If you are familiar with track runs then you know that it's all in the trap, if a TL runs 14.3 @ 97 mph than another TL that runs 14.8 at 97 mph is also capable of runing the 14.3, just becuase C&D was unable to do so doesn't mean it's not possible. For the record the upshift is in all the TL SH models as a protective mechanism against brake torquing, most high powered awd setups have some form of this.

You keep doing a paper comparison, that's ok but I like to think outside the box as well. If performance is a priority than you should compare the fastest models being the 6MT's where the TL has the performance edge and the AT's seem to be near draw but only as far as a race or track situation becuase of the already mentioned advantages and limitations. Plus the TL has consistantly shown much higher traps, so I would assume it's faster overall. Again interior measurements don't always translate to real world usage. The procedures are far from full proof. One example, how a seat is mounted (higher or lower) can counter the headroom measurement in that just because there is more measured room doesn't necessarily mean when seated in the car that it actually translates to having more or less room over ones head. Regardless, everyone will agree that overall interior space and comfort, not ride quailty (that is much more subjective), are in favor of the TL. Interior noise levels are not very controlled and are variable by nature. For example, road, weather and driving conditions. Since we are fair to the A4, we will be fair to the TL, which in this situation is a much larger vehicle with much larger engine and exhaust note, but how many poeple actually drive in silence anyway? Let's also be fair and say that the 19's on the TL are not exactly an acceleration boost.

Acura's attempt at Tier 1 does not mean or have anything to do with quality and it obviously is on par or better in that regard since it is outselling the A4's total number on 2 models vs their 4. Tier 1 aspirations come from wanting a complete vehicle lineup with varrying types from sports car to wagons and further distinquishing themselves from Honda. The last part where they are not on par is recognition, for better or worse that is what the grill is for.

The TL is a mid level offering not even intended to compete against a small car and little engine that could in the A4, that's why they came out with a V6 TSX. The TSX in general has a lot more to offer in several key areas for the same money and it's cheaper when equally equipped. Audi's mid level A6 equally equipped comes in at nearly $60k as do all the competitors mid sized. That's a huge value considering the TL SH loaded starts where other mids begin. Many write off the size becuase they don't want or need it but that does not mean it does not objectively present value. For the smaller seekers they have the TSX and just because many may want a more capable platform in the SH does make the size mean nothing. In the premium automotive segments, just a few inches more here and there commands thousands of dollars over it's smaller counterparts. In addition, Acura is class leading in expected resale value and right now Acura is market leading in that regard. It also is an overall better more consistant tested brand in safety and reliability.

cornelius

Since it's hard to make a decision on A4 vs. TL, why doesnt the OP just get a
Genesis V8. The price is similar and there shouldnt be any controversy about the
specs.

VTEC Racer

Because then he may want an opinion on its direct competitor, the Lexus GS.

princelybug

iTrader: (16)

docboy

Nada... All Lexus AWD sedans have that stupid hump in the driver's side console area.

cp3117

No, I understand your point, but what i find odd is that you actually think that a average 4G TL owner would use his vehicle in sport mode and shift at redline on a regular everyday basis....I can tell you right now that the same person would have no problem brake torquing an A4 on a daily basis also.
When you look at average everyday drivability (like the OP was looking for) The links i provided earlier clearly show that the A4 has better passing power etc at various speeds and these tests are conducted differently from 0-60 tests so your brake torquing conspiracy theory wouldnt apply here. In reality with both vehicles in drive and stepping on the gas from a start are both going to be slower than the mags as they both have lower shift points but the A4 will still be quicker because of its better transmission, more aggressive gearing and final drive ratio....This is the main reason why the A4 2.0T in real life situations is quicker than the TL and isnt even comparable to a 2.4L TSX and no manipulation, assumptions or estimations of 1/4 mile times and trap speeds are going to change that.

I never disputed which engine was overall more powerful. Just looking at the HP numbers and a quick trip to a dyno will prove that. When driving these two cars though in regards to low end acceleration the huge advantage is in the A4 favor and its because of its more aggressive transmission. Both trannys are identical in the 2.0T and the 3.2L and the reason why the 2.0T accelerates the same is because of less weight and more torque not this brake torquing thoery again because both can be brake torqued.

As far as comparing the TL 6MT to the 2.0T 6MT....why would anyone do that? The TL will have a much more aggressive tranny along with more suspention upgrades etc....If the stock 2.0T comes remotely close in performance I would be very dissapointed in Acura. The only exception to this is if the OP modded the 2.0T which he indicated he would consider. If so thats a different story as you could have much larger improvements from modding the Audi compared to the Acura.

Once again though your not providing any facts and using assumptions that C&D which is a reputable automotive publication using credible equiptment is doing things wrong. Lets say for the fun of it they where wrong, by using your estimates the TL they tested should have run low 5's Thats getting into M3 territory and im sure everyone here knows that isnt possible for the TL. Even Jeff at TOV laughed at the idea of the TL being mid 5s car.

This isnt meant to be rude but you should look up the stats on the 5AT vs the 6AT Triptronic, final drive ratios etc. This will probably help you understand better on why the 2.0T achieves what it does and how the trap speeds, brake torquing etc are rather irrelevant when comparing this to real world driving in this situation.

I not sure if you have driven both cars but I have and you can clearly see how the 2.0T is truly similar if not in some cases better in performance in daily driving compared to the TL. This is probably why the majority of mag reviews say the same thing.

Well you actually asked me to give reasons why the A4 is a better value without using subjective reasoning.....So now your accusing me of using facts and not subjective reasoning.

True, If performance was the top priority I would go with the S4 and call it a day as the TL or Acura in general really offers nothing to compete on that level.

Again though I have provided facts on Headroom and somehow you have manipulated that again. I guess I could do the same though being im 6'4" 220lbs and actually find the rear seat more comfortable in the A4 compared to the TL. Mainly due to the way the seat is engineered in the way it gives the feeling of more or equivilent room as the TL....although someone of a different size may feel otherwise.

I understand how different variables could affect dBH levels but if you look closer at the links I provided, you will see both vehicles where tested on the same day, same conditions and by the same driver. Typically 4cyl vehicles are louder than 6cyl versions depending on certain applications of course. So you can see in this instance the A4 is actually quieter and is probably due to the fact that the A4 uses more sound suppression material than the TL....This again is usually a quality you see in Tier 1 brands compared to Acura and other brands.

Generally in the automotive industry Acura isnt known to be on par with tier 1 brands when it comes to quality let alone better. This definately isnt the reason why it outsells the A4 in NA but mostly due to the fact Acura is a cheaper brand with more incentives that attract a different demographic. Most people trade up from an Acura to a tier 1 brand. Some do trade down from a tier 1 brand, but rarely.

Im not sure why, but i find Acura owners and sales people always compare their cars to a higher model than what it should be. You say that the TL is not even intended to compete with the A4 but the A6. Yet Acura's own marketing release specifically shows that the 4G TL is to compete with the likes of the A4. Of course if you compare a lower model to a higher one in a different class its going to look like a better value. Its like comparing a Buick Lacrosse to a 7 series because they have similar dimentions and saying that its such a better value.

winstrolvtec

TL SH vs A4
0-60 6.5, 5.9 - 6.7, 5.7 5-60 6.9 - 7.8, 7.2
30-50 3.9 - 3.1
50-70 4.8 - 4.0
0-100 16.8, 14.7 - 17.8, 16.2

The first thing to say is the obvious that it was noted, therefore verified, that full brake torque was applied on the faster C&D TL run, assume the other too. Now the 3rd time I am posting this, so try to read and actually understand what I write before you jump at a defense. There is no way around it, if you brake torque the TL SH AWD it will upshift and drive in 2nd before shifting back down to 1st where you will loose valuable time at launch. Now up to that point most cars either allowed for it or didn't so when C&D came across the TL there is nothing there that would make them think they couldn't do it as it is allowed but the up shift is virtually undetectable. I think most will agree with me when you assume it is capable of doing and knowing how much a difference it makes why would you waste time trying to get a great time run regularly? You wouldn't, all of your efforts would go to trying to get the best brake torqued time. So for the record those times were a product of the brake torque and auto up shift as noted, so they are at least .5 sec slower or worse, as proven. And it's a half second from the 15.1's and the 14.8's not the 14.4 and 14.3 as that is the non brake torqued run, try to pay attention.

Take a look at the difference in 0-60 on the A4 vs it's 5-60, a big difference in acceleration when you can't/don't brake torque, more than the normal. A higher trap usually lends to a better time so in the comparo's 15 sec runs, the TL traps higher but runs a slower time against the A4. That really makes a case for the brake torque issue because the time would be affected just like if you mis shifted at the track but not so much the trap because the distance is still the same. If the A4 was a marvel of gearing it would also have the trap to prove it, the TL is always going faster when it crosses the line so it is without a doubt a product of brake torque and high rpm launch ability, not power, torque or gearing. You cannot gear something to make it go faster without actually making it reach a mph faster but it can run faster than it's power allows with a good launch and great traction. Without brake torquing the A4 is really no faster than a TSX MT, 15's and 92 mph, it's the same.

The TL is clearly stronger up to 100 mph in nearly all cases, look it up. After, is where we see how it could use another gear, limitation of 5AT but not all that necessary considering the speed limit. The amount of variation in the tests leaves the 30-50 and 50-70 pulls a little inconclusive as no one really knows the exact parameters of this test to begin with. It could very well not do so well in mid acceleration but considering that the TL beat the A4 3.2 in a 45-65 pull on paper and it generally does well everywhere else, especially in low passing situations and top end under most conditions. It seems that something in the way it is run allows the 6AT to gain some advantage in the test.

You agree about the variances in NVH but fail to use reason in that the TL is always tested on 19's with max summer tires besides what was already mentioned so maybe when considering all that, the TL is actually sound proofed just as well because it is of equal quality and wins interior of year awards because it only looks nice, would you say?

Unfortunately for me being only 6 ft and 190 lb I need a mid sized for comfort nothing smaller will do, but I guess because you say Acura has not aimed the TL as a mid sized competitor, which it has, it's not actually a mid sized, regardless of size??? For what it is worth the TL has always been slotted in between the two segments but when the RL is gone or replaced with a bigger model and the TSX now being bigger and having a V6, essentially being a 3G carryover, what car is going to be the Acura mid? Also many RL owners have gone down to a 4G SH because it really isn't going down, last I checked it is basically the same car and that's a mid sized competitor. Look up Acura's 4G TL initial press release if you want to know where they market it, no offense, I could post it but this way you might actually read it before coming up with a defense.

Legend2TL

Actually it competes with both according to Acura

http://www.hondanews.com/categories/733/releases/4680

"the new TL arrives ready to compete with vehicles like the Audi A4 and A6, BMW 3-Series and 5-Series, Infiniti G35 and M35, Lexus ES, GS and IS sedans, and the Mercedes-Benz C-Class and E-Class."

All you stated here is only your opinion, not facts just your opinion which is fine. As long as you think this is the case fine.

I know several folks who've traded their Audi's for other brands. My neighbor up the street traded in a 06 A8L for a 09 MDX. Like some other Audi owners I know he grew weary of multiple trips to get non-maintenance repairs performed. Another former colleague traded a S4 for a WRX when numerous repairs and cost of ownership became unbearable to him. Maybe I just know rare Audi owners but I doubt it.

PsychDoc

While I still think the A4 is a wonderful car I was driving the other day and I noticed the LED running lights of the A4 and thought to myself that they looked more than a little cheesy. I particularly don't like that they turn off when the turn signal is engaged. I'm beginning to think that while some things begin to look better with age (e.g. the "beak") others look contrived and ostentatious the more you see them.

cornelius

Im pretty sure it's not rare because the resale value for the A4 is terrible.

cornelius

I wouldnt say they are direct competitors because the GS is a lot
more expensive.

SiGGy

If I was in your boat I would get the Audi over the Acura.

(everything past here is my opinion)

I had a loaner 2009 TL and wasn't impressed. The interior felt cheap. Doors were all plastic and hollow. Way too much plastic on the dash. And the trim pieces were not flattering to the interior. Then all of the mismatched fonts used on the large cluster of buttons on the dash was very cheap looking. And the steering wheel looked cheap too.

Sure Acura will always toss lots of *electronic* "features" in but it's at the cost of cheaper or less quality materials and engineering sacrifices.

I'm on my 2nd Acura, and they always suffer the same fates. Crappy factory tires, cheap exterior paint, cheap leather that ends up cracking, cheap brake design, and corner cutting engineering.

For one simple example grab any Acura door handle on the inside on a CLS to 3rd gen TL and pull on it from the inside when the door is shut. You'll see right away they didn't re-enforce the panel at the handle. The entire door panel flexes when you do this putting stress on ALL of the cheap plastic tabs that hold the interior skin on to the metal... Cutting corners like this over time and you end up with long term quality issues. Then try this in an Audi/VW/BMW/MB/Infinity/Lexus; solid as a rock. Has been for years.

IMO Acura is really the wannabe luxury brand still... sure they're bang for your buck. And if your on a budget Acura's are great; and really the best choice for those who are budget minded. But if you can afford another *true* luxury brand I'd go for it.

But on that note for their class I do have to say the MDX and RDX are nice though.

cornelius

It's true that Audi builds some *true* luxury cars, but the A4 is not one of them. It's an entry level budget luxury car just like the TL. I see more A4s, 328s, IS250s, and C230s than Civics, Camrys and Accords.

If the OP can afford a *true* luxury car, then I think the best value car would be the 535.

docboy

Excellent (and civil) discussion thus far...

I have to admit that I am still wary of Audi's reliability. Their past hx of reliability issues from MANY owners troubles me, although CR (assuming they are the authority on reliability) claims the past 2/3 years the A4 4 cylinder model per se have improved to above average reliability. Acuras typically have an all around solid history of above-average/excellent CR reliability.

I remember when Saturn first came out and CR gave their sedans/coupes above average-excellent reliability ratings. After a few years, those ratings plummeted to below average/poor.

The question is, can Audi's A4 reliability sustain its improvement to the level of the Acura TL?

PsychDoc

[quote=SiGGy;11199628]If I was in your boat I would get the Audi over the Acura.

(everything past here is my opinion) Thanks for clarifying that. Had you not pointed that out I would have assumed you were merely psychotic and out of touch with reality or severely intellectually challenged.

I had a loaner 2009 TL and wasn't impressed. The interior felt cheap. Doors were all plastic and hollow. You're kidding here, right? This is the same car that won Wards Automotive "Best Interior" this year.

Way too much plastic on the dash. WTF do you think a dash should be made of? Platinum perhaps? Get a grip dude!

And the trim pieces were not flattering to the interior. Then all of the mismatched fonts used on the large cluster of buttons on the dash was very cheap looking. And the steering wheel looked cheap too. Get your vision checked.

Sure Acura will always toss lots of *electronic* "features" in but it's at the cost of cheaper or less quality materials and engineering sacrifices. As opposed to the shit electronics/audio systems that BMW and M-B "throw in?"

For one simple example grab any Acura door handle on the inside on a CLS to 3rd gen TL and pull on it from the inside when the door is shut. The doors are particularly noteworthy for their solidity and "thunk" when they close. Now try this with an Accord and you can hear the difference. Frankly, try this with the current E-class M-B and you may be surprised at how tinny it sounds.

long term quality issues. Then try this in an Audi/VW/BMW/MB/Infinity/Lexus; solid as a rock. Has been for years. This must explain the legendary M-B and BMW reliability and the positively horrible long term reliability Acura's rack up in Consumer reports and elsewhere. (Have you taken your meds today?)

SiGGy

Wow, I pissed good in your cheerios here. I take it no ones opinions count besides your own since you bought an 09 Acura? And my last 8 years of owning different models speaks to nothing?

The door panels are straight plastic. They could be leather wrapped, soft treated. Lots of other options besides cheap hard plastic. The dash layout is a copy of BMW(s) which itself isn't horrible. The button fonts looks cheap to me as well do the buttons (also the font changes between functions). And the plastic trim that is suppose to look like aluminum in the model I drove was in was just cheap looking.

Nope fake plastic trim that is suppose to be aluminum is cheap looking.

Why are you so defensive of another persons opinions and thoughts? Do you think talking back about my thoughts and opinions is going to change my mind? Honestly, what were you trying to accomplish?

No it's they wow you with electronics but you get plastic paneled doors without bracing on the handles. Poorly designed brakes, and or cheap brake parts. Corners are cut to make the price margin they shoot for with their features. Just the reality of manufacturing, Acura in no way shape or form offers what BMW does at a lower price point. BMW for example uses a completely different philosophy when engineering their vehicles; 50/50 weight balance, evenly balanced brakes... list goes on.

tinny? Actually all of the MB's I've ever been in crack the window automatically to get rid of air pressure when you shut the door; then close it again. And it's sounded very solid.

The accord is a better looking car than the 2009 TL IMO. And are equally built as well. TL and the Accord are basically the same thing.

All cars have issues... and the internet is the place to find issues. Most people join forums like these to solve problems very few people are car enthusiasts, it's not the majority.

Do you seriously believe Acura has never had any major long term issues with the TL or other vehicles? And you say I'm on meds?

Guys who can afford a 550i buy one; they don't look back and say I should have bought a 09 TL instead. Acura is the budget minded purchaser, the frugal buyer. NOT the luxury or high end purchaser. Acura isn't even a luxury car manufacturer, the RL is the closest thing they make to a luxury vehicle.

You're 60 years old and these are best responses you could write to me? Seems more like something an early 20 year old would write who's too caught up in emotions over formed metal and plastic. It's just a car, and it's just my on it.


And again, these are my opinions of my experience in a 2009 TL. I never said don't buy an Acura. I said if you can afford the next level up go for it! If you can't afford it, well you just can't beat the deal Acura offers in terms of bang for you buck.

PetesTL

I agree with Siggy on some points here. After having owned 4 BMW's in the past 7 years, there's a reason why people keep buying BMW's in large numbers even during a recession. BMW just know how to build damn fine cars that people like & love to drive. The attention to detail and the quality of the materials and the fit and finish goes beyond anything from Acura or Infiniti. The 4G's interior does have a lot of hard plastics everywhere (esp. the door panels which scratch and scuff very easily) and the perforated aluminum trim does look and feel cheap. (I wished they used the wood trim from the RL instead). My biggest grip is the leather seats.....my driver's seat already has some ugly permanent wrinkles on the thigh bolsters......whereas my last 545i's leather seats looked as good at 30K miles as when it was brand new.

BMW build their cars to survive and excel at the world-famous autobahns. The stability and drivability of these cars at high speeds is world renowned. Jap cars just don't inspire confidance in their drivability at high speeds like their German counterparts. My 4G starts to shudder and twitch a little at over 80mph.....my last 545i felt as stable and quiet and rock solid at 100mph as if it were doing 25mph.

And let's face it, Acura is really lagging behind their competitors when it comes to engine and drivetrain technology. V-Tec is no longer cutting-edge....almost everybody is using some sort of variable-valve technology at this point. Even lowly Ford has trumped Acura by producing an Ecco-Boost engine that can perform like a V-8 with the gas mileage of a V6. BMW just walks all over Acura in the overall tech department....direct injection, twin-turbo's, diesels, dual-clutch DSG, night-vision, fully-active suspension systems, etc, etc. Even the famous SH-AWD isn't all that revolutionary anymore. New Audi's and BMW's are showing up with their own version of torque-vectoring AWD systems. BMW's new AWD systems trumps Acura's in that it uses torque vectoring during braking as well as during acceleration.

Acura makes good cars for a certain price point and are very good values but they are just not up to the same level in quality, luxury and drivability as BMW, Mercedes, and Audi. I like my TL and it's been fun, but after my lease is up, I'm definately going back to BMW or Audi. Like the saying goes, "There is no substitute."

winstrolvtec

No offense guys but you knock it and maybe rightfully so but the bottom line is you all own TL's because there are plenty of good reasons someone should but for other reasons maybe not, as is the case for all cars. And let's not forget that the grass is always greener on the other side. The Acura product is a more affordable one and just how does anyone expect them not to cut some corners, the thread now sounds like they charge $60k for a loaded TL, we know this is not the case.

I would rather spend $20k less on a TL SH than a 535xi or E350 4M etc, because that is a lot of money for the same amount of functionality. This is Acura, affordability without the loss of functionality. It is also a smarter investment in that you get a strong value with a larger return on the dollar in the form of a much stronger residual vlaue, plus it's a class leading brand in safety and reliability. Without even getting into the vehicle specifics that will sell them all by itself. The interior may not be 100% up to material grade on all accounts but it is far from cheap, I feel it's above the Infiniti G and most other premium entry level vehicles or at least on par. It's not far from the mid sized quality either and for whatever it's worth, even the base Porsche Cheyenne looks like a GM interior in comparison to the TL. The TL interior vs some of the better German's may be slighty cheaper suite but with a much better tailor, as some German makes materials may be a little better in some regards but their interior designs are in all honesty very old and bland looking. That's why the TL is Ward's auto interior of the year in a premium auto, because while it might not be excellent grade all over it's certianly not bad, (therefore good) and it's presented in a exceptional design and manner. Even with the soft creasing leather I still prefer the feel in the Acura as the other hard stuff may be excellent quality and very durable, I don't think it helps in keeping the luxurious feeling.

In many regards Germans do a lot of little things better but I feel that Acura accels in a lot of major areas in comparison, especially at the price point. I can deal with the little annoyances and nuisance in a value car but it should not be the case for "true" luxury but it still will be because it's the case with all cars and at the end of the day as passionate as I am about any automobile it's still just a machine that's sole purpose is transport from point A to point B.

The important thing to determine is if the extra price is justified. The funny thing is we are seeing Acura get more expensive and MB and Audi getting less, there is a good chance that it means that Acura is a more than adequate product for the money and the German car is a bit excessive, that's why we see less than loaded base engines and mostly mass entry level production even with all the better choices they offer. IMO, I don't feel that outside of what Acura offers that the price for an equally equipped direct competitor German model is justified, now for an M, AMG, 7 or S class or the like I fell differently and I have a feeling many of you feel the same way otherwise you probably wouldn't be a member here in the first palce.