Edmunds Comparison: Infiniti G37 Journey vs. Acura TL SH-AWD
11-17-2008, 07:03 PM
#41
Suzuka Master
Bingo, I said it here last night on another thread and I'll repeat it, Apples to Oranges.. Everyone here already knows the G37 is going to beat it straight line but come on this wasn't even fair. Who compares an all wheel to a rear wheel when they actually have an all wheel model?!#! Edmunds dissapoints here. Maybe you're right and they didn't have an X model and someone thought lets be the first to do a comparison, even if it's WHACK! 
I really look forward to the reputable car magazine reviews and comparisons..
I really look forward to the reputable car magazine reviews and comparisons..
11-17-2008, 07:20 PM
#44
On a side note...Edmunds is a reputable company for car reviews. I am sure if the TL won you would have found them very reputable. 
[/QUOTE]
I think the disagreements with the comparison are coming from the way in which it was conducted, clearly infiniti makes an awd model, that should have been the car in the comparison. If that had been the case and the infiniti won, I wouldn't complain.
[/QUOTE]I think the disagreements with the comparison are coming from the way in which it was conducted, clearly infiniti makes an awd model, that should have been the car in the comparison. If that had been the case and the infiniti won, I wouldn't complain.
11-17-2008, 07:28 PM
#45
How does Infiniti compare to Acura in terms of re-sale value?
Also, I understand that the G35, though very fast, was a bit raw and unrefined in many ways. Has the G37 been improved in those areas?
I test drove a G35 in 2006, you could actually feel the shifter vibrate and actually move during hard acceleration!
I would bet that is still the case with the G37 and one of the main reasons why I have a TL-S and not a G35 or 37. 
Also, I understand that the G35, though very fast, was a bit raw and unrefined in many ways. Has the G37 been improved in those areas?
I test drove a G35 in 2006, you could actually feel the shifter vibrate and actually move during hard acceleration!
I would bet that is still the case with the G37 and one of the main reasons why I have a TL-S and not a G35 or 37.
Last edited by blakura; 11-17-2008 at 07:31 PM.
11-17-2008, 07:38 PM
#46
6G TLX-S
Compare 2WD with 2WD, or compare AWD with AWD. This is apple for apple.
11-17-2008, 08:04 PM
#47
Just read the review. I guess the guy got some early holiday gifts from Infiniti.
Firstly, as mentioned on this thread...AWD vs RWD. Come on...That's lame considering Infiniti makes a G37x or whatever they call it.
Not sure but I think he mentioned the front of the TL about 98 times and his apparant distaste. Also didn't like the fact he didn't mention anything wrong with the Infiniti.
Then he basically says the price difference was the difference. Not a fair review in my view....He enjoyed the TL bashing between the lines.
Firstly, as mentioned on this thread...AWD vs RWD. Come on...That's lame considering Infiniti makes a G37x or whatever they call it.
Not sure but I think he mentioned the front of the TL about 98 times and his apparant distaste. Also didn't like the fact he didn't mention anything wrong with the Infiniti.
Then he basically says the price difference was the difference. Not a fair review in my view....He enjoyed the TL bashing between the lines.
11-17-2008, 08:23 PM
#49
11-17-2008, 08:59 PM
#50
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Raleigh, NC - USA
Age: 82
Posts: 7,674
Received 2,599 Likes
on
1,581 Posts
Wavehogger tested his new SH-AWD & got this
(Launching in D no torque loading, just pedal to the medal shifts between 6300-6500 rpm and wait it out) Times- (0-60, 1/4 mile): 6.5, 14.9 @ 95.2 mph & 6.35, 14.87 @98.1 mph
(Launching with tap and nail it method (like a rollout) & manual shift at 6900 rpm) Times- 6.1, 14.6 @97.8 mph (did twice almost exactly same)
The dynolicious also measures the estimated HP, and it read between 285-300 HP on the runs, so it's pretty accurate there as well.
11-17-2008, 09:43 PM
#51
You'll Never Walk Alone
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Age: 37
Posts: 9,493
Received 835 Likes
on
519 Posts
Thanks for posting wavehogger's time here Bear-AvHistory!
Lol, even a typical Acura driver can get much better time and trap speed than Edmunds' professional driver...lol...and the thing is, wavehogger's TL has not passed its break-in period yet. Most mags test cars when they have about 2000-3000 miles on them. I'd imagine high 5's for 0-60 and mid 14's@ 99mph is possible in the TL SH-AWD - which is marginally faster than what wavehogger got.
Dom, the engine in the TL is actually quite decent, considering its BMEP is actually 11.9 bar, which is higher than the G37, which is at 11.3 bar. BMEP as I mentioned in another post is a much better measure of the engineering that goes into the engine than just hp/L ratio. We all know DOHC engines can rev higher, and thus make more hp in most cases. The TL is limited by its SOHC design and so it can't rev as high.
Lol, even a typical Acura driver can get much better time and trap speed than Edmunds' professional driver...lol...and the thing is, wavehogger's TL has not passed its break-in period yet. Most mags test cars when they have about 2000-3000 miles on them. I'd imagine high 5's for 0-60 and mid 14's@ 99mph is possible in the TL SH-AWD - which is marginally faster than what wavehogger got.
Dom, the engine in the TL is actually quite decent, considering its BMEP is actually 11.9 bar, which is higher than the G37, which is at 11.3 bar. BMEP as I mentioned in another post is a much better measure of the engineering that goes into the engine than just hp/L ratio. We all know DOHC engines can rev higher, and thus make more hp in most cases. The TL is limited by its SOHC design and so it can't rev as high.
11-17-2008, 09:53 PM
#52
Honda Fanboy
Nobody really takes Edmunds seriously so it's not going to be any different with this article. Besides, Edmunds has hardly ever given any Acura a truly positive review. They always seem to contradict what the rest of the industry says. I rate them on par with The Truth About Cars. They simply just don't like Acura.
Several things wrong with the review though:
1.) RWD vs AWD? Give me a break. Put the AWD G37 up against the TL SH-AWD and the TL would walk a G37 on a track. These cars were not tested together on a track so aside for speeding around a couple cones, the results are questionable, as always is from Edmunds. The performance numbers from Edmunds always seem to vary the most from the rest of the industry tests.
2.) The article basically says the G37 wins because of price. However, had they tested a G37X, the price difference would have been non-existent. Would the G still have won then? Doubt it since the article specifically says the price difference is what put the G over the TL.
3.) In the $40k+ range, people are going to want luxury and refinement with their sport. Edmunds clearly says that the G's interior still is sub-par, has a rough ride and a course engine. The G will win the 0-60 test every day of the week, but not everyone floors their car at every light. If flat out performance is what was on everyones mind, then the less powerful, more expensive 3g TL wouldn't have consistently out sold the cheaper, faster G35.
Several things wrong with the review though:
1.) RWD vs AWD? Give me a break. Put the AWD G37 up against the TL SH-AWD and the TL would walk a G37 on a track. These cars were not tested together on a track so aside for speeding around a couple cones, the results are questionable, as always is from Edmunds. The performance numbers from Edmunds always seem to vary the most from the rest of the industry tests.
2.) The article basically says the G37 wins because of price. However, had they tested a G37X, the price difference would have been non-existent. Would the G still have won then? Doubt it since the article specifically says the price difference is what put the G over the TL.
3.) In the $40k+ range, people are going to want luxury and refinement with their sport. Edmunds clearly says that the G's interior still is sub-par, has a rough ride and a course engine. The G will win the 0-60 test every day of the week, but not everyone floors their car at every light. If flat out performance is what was on everyones mind, then the less powerful, more expensive 3g TL wouldn't have consistently out sold the cheaper, faster G35.
11-17-2008, 10:33 PM
#53
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Raleigh, NC - USA
Age: 82
Posts: 7,674
Received 2,599 Likes
on
1,581 Posts
As far as the number of sales point goes, the hole in the donut is the 3G was much better looking then the G35 making it more attractive to many people. I do not thats the case with the 4G & the G37.
11-17-2008, 10:43 PM
#54
Honda Fanboy
I always felt the 2003-2006 G35 was a good looking car and I think the current gen looks even better. Looks are subjective and don't believe that had much of an effect on the sales of either cars.
11-17-2008, 11:15 PM
#55
You'll Never Walk Alone
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Age: 37
Posts: 9,493
Received 835 Likes
on
519 Posts
IMO, I think it's somewhat fair to compare the SH-AWD TL to the RWD G37. Afterall, the RWD G37 is supposed to be a "better" driver's car than the G37x I believe. With that said, I'd love to see a comparison between the TL SH-AWD 6MT vs the G37 7AT. Why not the G37 6MT? Well, IMO, I think it's more fair to compare the best of each car, so the best of the TL is the TL SH-AWD 6MT, while the best G is the G37 7AT. The 6MT G is now slower than the 7AT model, while we all know the 6MT TL has always been faster than the 5AT model by a huge margin.
11-18-2008, 12:49 AM
#56
Advanced
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2.) The article basically says the G37 wins because of price. However, had they tested a G37X, the price difference would have been non-existent. Would the G still have won then? Doubt it since the article specifically says the price difference is what put the G over the TL.
If you take price (25%) out of the equation, the TL still would have lost.
Infiniti G37 - 61.5
Acura TL SH-AWD - 58.4
Also, look at their technical comments about the TL:
Acceleration Comments: The SH-AWD system doesn't quite know what to do when the driver whacks the throttle from a stop. There seems to be a moment of thinking before progress begins in earnest.
Handling Comments: Plenty of grip and excellent turn-in, but back-and-forth transitions seemed to be too much for AWD system to sort out. It was difficult to find a rhythm and each cone was its own "event" to be tackled by the driver.
Braking Comments: Brakes faded when stopping between acceleration runs, however. Also, the left front wheel locked up from approximately 30 mph to zero on one stop. Anomaly?
Handling Comments: Plenty of grip and excellent turn-in, but back-and-forth transitions seemed to be too much for AWD system to sort out. It was difficult to find a rhythm and each cone was its own "event" to be tackled by the driver.
Braking Comments: Brakes faded when stopping between acceleration runs, however. Also, the left front wheel locked up from approximately 30 mph to zero on one stop. Anomaly?
11-18-2008, 02:33 AM
#57
Honda Fanboy
How does Edmunds rate the G so much higher in performance when it said this a month ago:
To be honest, the Infiniti G35s didn't even get a second drive in the comparison. From the second corner of the first hot lap, it was painfully obvious that the heavy effort and lurching response of the clutch pedal (it turns out they're all like this), the heavy-effort shift action and an inability to keep its rear tires hooked up on anything less than a dead-straight piece of track kept the G35s from being able to put up a good fight. On this track, it required constant vigilance just to keep the G35s on the pavement.
The TL is heavier than the G and is AWD. AWD cars will usually always have slower slalom times compared to a 2WD car when all things are equal. Even more reason why a more legitimate comparison would have been a TL SH-AWD vs G37x.
As for the brakes, Edmunds just went ahead and contradicted themselves again. In one paragraph they claim that the TL's brakes outperformed the G's and was able to withstand fading longer than the G. Yet in in another paragraph they say the TL suffered from brake fade and didn't mention anything about the G's brakes. Which one is it?
11-18-2008, 08:02 AM
#58
Three Wheelin'
I can't wait for Motor Trend and Car & Driver to come out with their reviews and comparisons. These guys really know how to squeeze the best #'s out of the cars. If Car & Driver was able to somehow obtain a 5.7 sec 0-60 out of a '09 A4 (which Edmunds only was able to get a 6.9!), I can't wait to see what they can do with a 4G TL/SH-AWD.
11-18-2008, 02:02 PM
#59
Safety Car
11-19-2008, 08:11 PM
#61
Burning Brakes
This caught my eye... now THIS is exactly what a TL should be aiming for. 5.4 seconds 0-60 
With this engine paired to a brilliant new seven-speed automatic, the G37 sports the mechanical equivalent of a gazelle's legs. It tears to 60 mph in just 5.4 seconds (5.2 seconds with 1 foot of rollout like on a drag strip) on its way to a quarter-mile sprint of 13.7 seconds at 102.8 mph.
11-19-2008, 08:15 PM
#62
Burning Brakes
well, in conclusion, all the 4G TL needs is:
1- better transmission (6speed or 7speed automatic and a 6mt option)
2- more powerful engine
3- redesigned grill and redesigned rear
1- better transmission (6speed or 7speed automatic and a 6mt option)
2- more powerful engine
3- redesigned grill and redesigned rear
11-19-2008, 08:31 PM
#63
Suzuka Master
Highly unlikely. When people want a car with AWD capability (most likely for harsh climates), a 2WD car won't cut it. When people want a 2WD car, they won't buy a AWD one which is always heavier, slower, less fuel economy, and with higher maintenance cost.
Compare 2WD with 2WD, or compare AWD with AWD. This is apple for apple.
Compare 2WD with 2WD, or compare AWD with AWD. This is apple for apple.
11-19-2008, 08:35 PM
#64
Suzuka Master
How does Infiniti compare to Acura in terms of re-sale value?
Also, I understand that the G35, though very fast, was a bit raw and unrefined in many ways. Has the G37 been improved in those areas?
I test drove a G35 in 2006, you could actually feel the shifter vibrate and actually move during hard acceleration! I would bet that is still the case with the G37 and one of the main reasons why I have a TL-S and not a G35 or 37.
Also, I understand that the G35, though very fast, was a bit raw and unrefined in many ways. Has the G37 been improved in those areas?
I test drove a G35 in 2006, you could actually feel the shifter vibrate and actually move during hard acceleration!
I would bet that is still the case with the G37 and one of the main reasons why I have a TL-S and not a G35 or 37. I was very focusd on this when I bought my 2nd Type-S this past year. The regular TL has better resale than a G35, but the G35 resale of the 07/08 modle is much better than the previosu 1G was. The Type-S is in the middle it's resale tends to be a little better than a G35, but not as good as a TL with Navi. That being said, in the end if you keep the car a long time (I typically DON'T) then resale is not as important since in 5 years the gap will likely be smaller.
The 3TL was king of resale sicne it was such a great value, styled for the masses and liked by many. Time will tell if the 4G does as well, my guess is it will since those that buy it or want it value the incredible value the car usually represents and love the Honda quality.
11-20-2008, 12:13 AM
#65
You'll Never Walk Alone
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Age: 37
Posts: 9,493
Received 835 Likes
on
519 Posts
Wavelogger is already getting 6.1s in his TL with only a few hundred miles on it. I'm sure C&D, road and track, or motortrend can do something better than that. Probably not 5.4s with the automatic, perhaps 6s flat? Surely it will be faster than what Edmunds got..6.7s. That's funny..lol...they got 6.9s for Audo A4 3.2 Quattro, while C&D got 5.7s. A difference of 1.2s.
11-20-2008, 01:57 AM
#66
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Raleigh, NC - USA
Age: 82
Posts: 7,674
Received 2,599 Likes
on
1,581 Posts
11-20-2008, 08:11 AM
#67
Three Wheelin'
Wavelogger is already getting 6.1s in his TL with only a few hundred miles on it. I'm sure C&D, road and track, or motortrend can do something better than that. Probably not 5.4s with the automatic, perhaps 6s flat? Surely it will be faster than what Edmunds got..6.7s. That's funny..lol...they got 6.9s for Audo A4 3.2 Quattro, while C&D got 5.7s. A difference of 1.2s.
11-20-2008, 08:13 AM
#68
Three Wheelin'
11-20-2008, 08:48 AM
#69
Race Director
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Illinois
Age: 45
Posts: 10,741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Man, I prefer the G37 coupe and G37 sedan vs. the G37 convertible. It just looks odd. Props to Infiniti though. Is it safe to say that there will never be an Acura convertible?
11-20-2008, 12:57 PM
#70
No. There is a lot of talk about a convertible in the future. Several years ago, we were promised an all out product binge. We already have the 2009 TSX and 2009 TL. The next products will be the new crossover, followed by a coupe (this might be the convertible), followed by the new RL, and then finally the NSX replacement.
11-20-2008, 01:41 PM
#71
Instructor
[/B]
I'll say it again, they compared two totally different cars, otherwise I can't control the actual results and #'s. So I'm only knocking them for that. I don't believe other car mags will pick those two models again as a direct comparison, so that is all i'm saying. gee wizz
I'll say it again, they compared two totally different cars, otherwise I can't control the actual results and #'s. So I'm only knocking them for that. I don't believe other car mags will pick those two models again as a direct comparison, so that is all i'm saying. gee wizz
Face it, Acura had it's ass handed to them and it's their top TL model, the Infiniti isn't perfect but bettered the TL.
This may be a first for me possibly moving to Infinity, Acura can keep their ass ugly underpowered TL.
11-20-2008, 02:03 PM
#72
11-20-2008, 02:11 PM
#73
Instructor
Wavelogger is already getting 6.1s in his TL with only a few hundred miles on it. I'm sure C&D, road and track, or motortrend can do something better than that. Probably not 5.4s with the automatic, perhaps 6s flat? Surely it will be faster than what Edmunds got..6.7s. That's funny..lol...they got 6.9s for Audo A4 3.2 Quattro, while C&D got 5.7s. A difference of 1.2s.
If C&D can drive the TL faster then they can do the same with the G37.
G37-13.7 second quarter
TL-15 second flat quarter
Guys, that's not even close, it's a trouncing to say the least.
The Acura may have better resale and a bit more upscale with the interior materials but in the performance category there is no argument.
Personally I can't get over the looks of the TL for starters and I'm looking for more fun to drive at this point in my life which equals Infiniti right now, maybe when I hit 60 or so I'll look at this TL.
Acura doesn't offer a single car I'm interested in right now, if I had to choose a Honda product I would look at the V6 Accord on the basis of value.
11-20-2008, 02:12 PM
#74
You'll Never Walk Alone
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Age: 37
Posts: 9,493
Received 835 Likes
on
519 Posts
Lots of factors come into play and everyone tests a little differently. Road conditions, weather (temp., humidity), driver skill, condition of the car all play a factor in the final numbers. Consumer Reports, for example, often run their tests with the car carring a passenger and some luggage.
11-20-2008, 02:26 PM
#75
You'll Never Walk Alone
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Age: 37
Posts: 9,493
Received 835 Likes
on
519 Posts
Look at the numbers, it's embarrassing for Acura.
If C&D can drive the TL faster then they can do the same with the G37.
G37-13.7 second quarter
TL-15 second flat quarter
Guys, that's not even close, it's a trouncing to say the least.
The Acura may have better resale and a bit more upscale with the interior materials but in the performance category there is no argument.
Personally I can't get over the looks of the TL for starters and I'm looking for more fun to drive at this point in my life which equals Infiniti right now, maybe when I hit 60 or so I'll look at this TL.
Acura doesn't offer a single car I'm interested in right now, if I had to choose a Honda product I would look at the V6 Accord on the basis of value.
If C&D can drive the TL faster then they can do the same with the G37.
G37-13.7 second quarter
TL-15 second flat quarter
Guys, that's not even close, it's a trouncing to say the least.
The Acura may have better resale and a bit more upscale with the interior materials but in the performance category there is no argument.
Personally I can't get over the looks of the TL for starters and I'm looking for more fun to drive at this point in my life which equals Infiniti right now, maybe when I hit 60 or so I'll look at this TL.
Acura doesn't offer a single car I'm interested in right now, if I had to choose a Honda product I would look at the V6 Accord on the basis of value.
The fastest for the TL SH-AWD 5AT (officially) is 0-60 in 6.3s and 1/4mile in 14.8@97mph, which is done by Road and Track. Car and Driver did a test with the G37 6MT sedan and gOt 0-60mph in 5.2s and 13.8s@104mph.
What we are waiting for is C&D and Motortrend to test the TL SH-AWD 5AT.
By the way, I don't think anyone here is saying the TL SH-AWD will out drag a G35, let alone the G37. What most people here are saying is, The TL SH-AWD 5AT is a mid 14's car, not 15. People believe this because Edmunds got 15@95mph for the Audi A4 3.2 Quattro, while Car and Driver managed to get 14.3@100mph. If C&D could get 0.7s and 5mph with the A4, why not the TL? We are not saying that's going to happen, we are just saying that's a possibility.
And Yes, even at 14.3@100mph, that's still a big difference between that and the G37 7AT. Of course, we all know that the 5AT is the main problem. That's why we are also waiting to see what the 6MT model can do. Traditionally, the 6MT model is 0.5s faster form 0-60mph and the 1/4 mile, and a trap speed that's about 3mph higher. Theoretically, the fastest TL should be a low 14@100mph car. Yes, this is ricer's math, yes this is bench racing, but again, I want to stress that we just want to see more numbers from different mags.
11-20-2008, 02:34 PM
#76
Three Wheelin'
Look at the numbers, it's embarrassing for Acura.
If C&D can drive the TL faster then they can do the same with the G37.
G37-13.7 second quarter
TL-15 second flat quarter
Guys, that's not even close, it's a trouncing to say the least.
The Acura may have better resale and a bit more upscale with the interior materials but in the performance category there is no argument.
Personally I can't get over the looks of the TL for starters and I'm looking for more fun to drive at this point in my life which equals Infiniti right now, maybe when I hit 60 or so I'll look at this TL.
Acura doesn't offer a single car I'm interested in right now, if I had to choose a Honda product I would look at the V6 Accord on the basis of value.
If C&D can drive the TL faster then they can do the same with the G37.
G37-13.7 second quarter
TL-15 second flat quarter
Guys, that's not even close, it's a trouncing to say the least.
The Acura may have better resale and a bit more upscale with the interior materials but in the performance category there is no argument.
Personally I can't get over the looks of the TL for starters and I'm looking for more fun to drive at this point in my life which equals Infiniti right now, maybe when I hit 60 or so I'll look at this TL.
Acura doesn't offer a single car I'm interested in right now, if I had to choose a Honda product I would look at the V6 Accord on the basis of value.
How many posts are you going to make saying the same thing? You hate the TL--fine....hate Acura.....fine. Go be an Infiniti fan-boy. Nobody here cares. (BTW, the TL SH-AWD pulled .93G on the skidpad....is that what you called "trounced?")
Last edited by PetesTL; 11-20-2008 at 02:37 PM.
11-20-2008, 04:27 PM
#77
Instructor
My post was directed at the Edmunds comparison Pete, some of the posts here mentioned that the performance tests were close and they really weren't, although I'll agree the TL AWD handled better which is a plus.
I don't hate Acura, far from it as I own a beautiful modded 2001 CL type S and a new 2008 base TL which I drive to work.
I was ready to buy the 2009 but came away disappointed after seeing it and even more so when reading about comparisons like this one.
Acura is obviously targeting a different market with this TL and that's fine, I just believe they missed the mark.
If you like your car that's great, enjoy, but I'm still entitled to my opinion and it was based on the test for the most part.
11-20-2008, 05:28 PM
#78
Racer
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Ft Lauderdale Fl
Age: 48
Posts: 389
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
My post was directed at the Edmunds comparison Pete, some of the posts here mentioned that the performance tests were close and they really weren't, although I'll agree the TL AWD handled better which is a plus.
I don't hate Acura, far from it as I own a beautiful modded 2001 CL type S and a new 2008 base TL which I drive to work.
I was ready to buy the 2009 but came away disappointed after seeing it and even more so when reading about comparisons like this one.
Acura is obviously targeting a different market with this TL and that's fine, I just believe they missed the mark.
If you like your car that's great, enjoy, but I'm still entitled to my opinion and it was based on the test for the most part.
I don't hate Acura, far from it as I own a beautiful modded 2001 CL type S and a new 2008 base TL which I drive to work.
I was ready to buy the 2009 but came away disappointed after seeing it and even more so when reading about comparisons like this one.
Acura is obviously targeting a different market with this TL and that's fine, I just believe they missed the mark.
If you like your car that's great, enjoy, but I'm still entitled to my opinion and it was based on the test for the most part.
11-20-2008, 06:11 PM
#79
Three Wheelin'
My post was directed at the Edmunds comparison Pete, some of the posts here mentioned that the performance tests were close and they really weren't, although I'll agree the TL AWD handled better which is a plus.
I don't hate Acura, far from it as I own a beautiful modded 2001 CL type S and a new 2008 base TL which I drive to work.
I was ready to buy the 2009 but came away disappointed after seeing it and even more so when reading about comparisons like this one.
Acura is obviously targeting a different market with this TL and that's fine, I just believe they missed the mark.
If you like your car that's great, enjoy, but I'm still entitled to my opinion and it was based on the test for the most part.
I don't hate Acura, far from it as I own a beautiful modded 2001 CL type S and a new 2008 base TL which I drive to work.
I was ready to buy the 2009 but came away disappointed after seeing it and even more so when reading about comparisons like this one.
Acura is obviously targeting a different market with this TL and that's fine, I just believe they missed the mark.
If you like your car that's great, enjoy, but I'm still entitled to my opinion and it was based on the test for the most part.
11-20-2008, 06:15 PM
#80