Even better is the 500hp 911 Turbo or the 530hp 911 Turbo S.

 

why not just get a altima,sundai, muuszda...no way in heck are really comparing a accord to a TL...Same family..but the TL got the Y and X chromosome...

 

saw the new accord today at work.. parked a few cars away from it..

god to say.. it looks wayyyyy better than the last gens.. props to honda for stepping up their game..

 

Got my new Car & Driver today, (Nov '12 issue), and the new Accord kicked a** in their 4 car comparison. They tested the 4 cylinder EX model against the new Altima, Fusion and Passat. The article emphatically declares that Honda has rediscovered its lost mojo and is once again the benchmark. They said it was a "sweet driving" car. I have high hopes that the '14 TL(X) will also emerge as a formidable vehicle. Can't wait!

 

Found an article testing the '13 Accord Touring. The article claims a 0-60 time of 5.6 seconds for the new Accord. Surely, the '14 redesign of the TL(X) will have an even better time than its "lowly" cousin Accord. I keep singing the praises of the new Accord because I feel like the same noise-reduction, comfort, technology, fuel economy and performance improvements will also be evident in the TL's redesign......which means the '14 TL should be one heck of a car! Here's the link to the article.

http://blogs.wsj.com/drivers-seat/20...ogle_news_blog

 

I wonder why the camry wsan't since it's been the best seller in the catagory for many years.

5.6, impressive!

 

I just test drove a 2013 Honda Accord (full v6, leather, etc).

Technology was kind of cool. Lane Departure Warning worked as I drifted.

Shifting was terrible under hard acceleration. Kind of "blah" driving it.

 

How fast is 0-60 in the '12 TL fwd always?

 

My understanding is that it's the same at the AWD, mainly due to the extra drivetrain loss from the AWD system.

 

I don't recall seeing any tests of the FWD TL in any of the usual publications, so it's hard to say without any real data. The engine is plenty powerful, but the FWD setup is going to hurt the launch.

I drove one recently as a loaner. Very nice car (but I still like my AWD better).

 

They didn't include the Camry because it had recently lost in a comparison and the 4 cars they tested were all brand new models.

 

For the record, I am a big fan of the new Accord.

However, let's not all wish away everything on the old TL for the pro's of the new Accord. For instance, the reduced interior noise volume (NVH) is said to have come from switching up from the old double-wishbone suspension that we all know and love to a strut-suspension in the front and multi-link in the rear. This setup has universally been known to decrease a car's NVH levels, but at what cost? Will it still feel like a Honda? Just food for thought. Or maybe I'm not even raising a valid point anymore since all Hondas have gone for electric power steering now. Also, I do hear that Porsche's use strut front suspensions, but the great advantages of double-wishbone have always been a very flat handling characteristic.

Let's all agree that the 2014 TL(X) better roll out with a 6-speed manual in the first model year, amiright? I also wouldn't mind if the TL would have some sort of battery powered electric SH-AWD like the RLX either. I would certainly be game for a new one when it comes up for sale. It'll be sad letting my '10 TL go though :-(

 

The first Accord Touring I have seen was my neighbours 4 cylinder model. Unfortunately we are not really freindly (long story), and as such I have not spoken to him about it, He came off 2 Ford Flex', (I cannot believe how ugly they are). Anyway it is a knock out. The HID headlights and LED DRLs and Tailights are very nice, and the car looks good from all angles, especially the rear. The interior is beautiful as well. Clearly Honda has learned from their previous Accord, which was okay. To me the new Accord is back to what made Honda special. It outclasses the new Camry and Altima already and likely will outsell the Sonata and Optima, but the latter car is still a knockout. To me now the Sonata is not aging well and Hondas normally do. I think with the advancements of the Accord, it is close to as good as our present TLs. That said I would wait for the new TL as it will have to be that much better in all ways. I truly believe Honda is finding its way again after resting on its laurels. The new Accord, CRV and RDX are just the beginning of how well the new vehicles are looking and advancing.

 

^^^^^^^^^^

In the States, the Touring model only comes with a V6. I noticed you were in Canada so I'm presuming the Touring comes with a 4 cylinder there as you mentioned.

 

Really? You like the new CRV? I think it looks ugly what with the big butt overhang over the rear wheels. It also still has a shitty 5 speed automatic transmission that has such long gears that I'm surprised it pull away from a stoplights at all. I hope their midcycle refresh at least gives it an Earth Dreams engine with CVT transmission like the Accord. Also, it's not really as sporty as other small-utes in its same category.

 

Just found a new review from "Car & Driver", testing the '13 Accord Touring. The article highly praises the new Accord V6. They list the 0-60 time as 5.6 seconds with the 6-speed automatic transmission. The '14 TL has to better that figure which thrills me greatly. Could it be possible that we get a sub 5.5 second 0-60 time from the next TL? Here's the link to the article.

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...-6-test-review

 

I guess so as the model my neighbour has is a 4 cylinder Touring. Canadians like the smaller engines so maybe thats why we have them. That said I bet with the deactivating cylinders the gas mileage would be close.

 

I really like the new CRV. That said I am sure the RDX will be more likely for me as it is just that much nicer. There is a ton out there, so you must be in the minority.

 

I have yet to see a bad review of the new Accord.

 

In addition, I believe in Canada that the V6 Touring comes with the same 18" wheels found on the sport. Kinda disappointing it's not an option in the states, though they can be swapped on with relative ease. The 19" HFP rim option on the V6 EX-L coupe would be REAL nice on the sedan.

I'm sorta on the same fence here, but I'm very much inclined to see what the 2014 TL(X) has to offer, especially if it ends up optionally carrying the same AWD system as the RLX amidst all the other tech/engine updates in the Accord. Besides some of the obvious new Accord "cons" already mentioned here, it suffers from a lackluster audio system based on feedback in the forums already. They're also having problems with connectivity issues via bluetooth and other little stereo-related glitches which will probably be ironed out via firmware updates. I'm sure the first year issues with the Accord will also make for a more seamless TL(X) release. That all being said, for folks here complaining about an Accord north of $34k, I'm seeing that you can pick up the Touring for invoice (~$30,500) if you do your homework and haggle. That should get better. This is a tough choice, but I'm willing to wait until the spring to see what's on the horizon.

Anyone have an idea when we can expect to hear details regarding the 2014 TL(X)? I'm hoping for some sort of info following the RLX debut at the end of the month.

 

This

I definitely hope for some electric SH-AWD to come to the next TL(X)!

 

TL without a doubt. End of the day ..... It's an Acura.

 

Is the new Accord AWD???

SH-AWD is amazing. FWD will never corner or handle like AWD, so if you care about performance get an AWD vehicle!

 

Hey all, first post and a brand new owner of a (gently used....5500 on the ODO) 2012 SHAWD tech here...Silver Moon over Ebony, and I'm in love.

That being said, I came from Nissan. First, an Altima Coupe, loaded, with a 6MT and 3.5L V6 with 270 HP, then a Murano (more family-friendly). I came to the TL because I wanted something family could ride in, while still being something that I, as someone who LOVES to drive, can toss around a little, and won't break the bank.

The Honda to Acura comparison is, logically, a lot like the Nissan to Infiniti comparison. I've sat in both Nissan and Infiniti stuff, and I sat in someone's 2013 Accord. I just don't see the comparison...while there are bits of familiarity in the interior and tech between the normal and luxury-branded stuff, both Nissan and Honda, the normal-badge stuff just doesn't bridge the gap fully, nor should it. My loaded Altima Coupe, with its premium tech, leather, etc etc, just didn't compare in fit, finish, and build quality to most Infiniti stuff.

Likewise, Acura's luxury is worth the premium. People say it's lost some of its panache over the years, but sitting in my TL is a dream compared to my Murano, which was comparable in terms of amenities, i.e. Nav, leather, premium audio. To me, interior design is huge...exterior looks are important too, but how one feels when operating the car is a big deal. Button layout, dash material, etc. I'm sorry, Honda/Nissan/Toyota aren't going to have that same atmosphere of luxury you get in Acura/Infiniti/Lexus. It's worth the extra money to me. I mean seriously...AWD vs. FWD aside, what "looks" more fun to drive?

Accord? If you didn't know it was an Accord, it could just as well be the interior of the new Odyssey.


Or this? Absolutely beautiful if you ask me.

 

I've sat in a 2013 accord as well and like the 121 stated its nice but doesn't compare. The only items I liked inside the accord more aesthetically was the shift knob and the double screen for audio/climate controls. But now that I look at the interiors one below the other I can't even say I like the double screen design more then the TL button layout. Yes it's more tech but it doesn't flow as nicely.

 

Whether one gets the Accord or the TL, is a value judgement call.
For some people, it's worth the extra money to get that better leather, interior trims and etc. I haven't driven the new Accord but I would imagine the TL would be quieter. Secondly, the 4G TL is on it's way out and the 13 Accord is totally redesigned and will be in the market for a good 5 years or so.

Having said the above, at least on paper, pound for pound I would give the edge to the Accord.

I know I will get shot for my next statement from TL FWD owners but if you are not going to get the SH-AWD, I see no point of buying the TL over the Accord other than for styling.

 

Everyone here seems to be buying a new Accord based on looks and the features offered on paper. What about the driving dynamics and build quality? To 121's point, the Accord Touring is a loaded up version of a low to mid level sedan while the TL starts of as a luxury level car. I ran into that with my last car. I had a loaded Altima SE V6 but deep inside the car was a cheap four cylinder car. I told myself the next time I get a car, instead of getting the loaded lower model - get the stripped higher model.
I just got a 2012 FWD base a month ago and I have to say this thing feels solid as a rock. The price was less than what I'd pay for an Accord touring today. I haven't driven, or even sat in, the new Accord but I have a feeling it wont have the same quality feel. They're nice though and I saw one the other day that made me ask myself the same question.

 

^^ What he said...

The new Accord is much like how I described the Maxima when I test drove it before deciding on the TL. Both are perfectly fine nice cars, but nothing that make me want to grab my wallet and go buy one.

 

For the guys that haven't say in the new accord I think one of the biggest disappointments is the bolstering in the seats, it's terrible. On the TL the seats hug your body (SH anyway, don't recall if FWD are the same), on the accord it's like the pulled a leather rug over a seat and stitched it down on the bottom of the chair.

 

I had the same question a few monthes ago.
The Accord was smoother, reg fuel, No comparison on the interior.
The Tl Advance 2012 (which is the same as the 2013) was the same price.
I wanted White over black which Honda did not offer.
I feel buying the TL that I got a lot nicer car for the same money.
My car before this one was a 2010 Tl. I had just under 250,000 miles on it. Can't go wrong!

 

Holy S! That's a ton if miles in a tiny period of time.

 

I would test drive both and buy the one I love, which is the reason I am in a 2013 TL SH-AWD instead of a Genesis or C350 Sport.

 

That 5.6 is bs. I can guarantee you would not be able to get 5.6 in YOUR accord by stomping on the gas pedal. Probably closer to 8.

 

Check the reviews. The V6 is getting into the mid 5s. Even the 4 cylinder sport ran high 6s according to C&D. The new powerplants are quick.

 

For the money and top notch features like LED headlamp and lane change camera, I say the Accord Touring.

 

What do you do? Drive to your vacation home in Mongolia on the weekends? Jesus Christ.

 

I agree, I just upgraded to a '13 from an '04 I bought new in 2004. It's not what the outside looks like it is the DRIVE! I plan to keep my shawd for two years and then buy the second model year TLX after most of the bugs are worked out (assuming I like the car). My salesperson said the TLX will be a smaller car (close in size to the BMW 335) which could be a deal breaker for me. Who knows if he was making that up

You can have the Accord.....The SHAWD is by far the the most fun I have ever had driving a car. Accelerate IN a turn, yea we got that.

 

Forget the reviews. You and I and everybody else know these guys cook the numbers in one way or another. I maybe could see 6.5 to 7 as an average the old fashioned way of stomping on the gas.

 

I know those numbers aren't real world figures since some magazines calculate it with 1' rollout, others torque brake which unless you're a maniac or just don't care about the car would never do, manufacture provides special tires, etc. But it's not like they're not doing the same thing when testing the Altima, Camry, Passat, etc.

 

I agree I wouldn't drive my car the way the mags do to get the absolute best 0-60 and 1/4 mile times. But as mentioned, they drive all their cars the same way. The Accord stacks up very well.

Here are the results C&D got for the 4 cylinder with 6MT:

C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 6.6 sec
Rolling start, 5–60 mph: 7.0 sec

And here are the results for the V6 Sedan Auto from C&D:

C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 5.6 sec
Rolling start, 5–60 mph: 5.9 sec

Again, you and I wouldn't treat our cars this way, but these times do show what the cars are capable of. They are surprisingly quick. Drive one. We did, and we bought the 4 cylinder 6MT. In 50/50 highway - urban/suburban driving, it's averaging over 30 mpg on a brand new engine. We've seen as high as 37 on the highway. This is in cold temps with winter gas. It will go up as the warmer weather gets here and the car gets more miles on it.