Hate my 4G TL!
10-07-2008, 10:12 AM
#81
Senior Moderator
iTrader: (1)
10-07-2008, 12:40 PM
#82
Racer
Join Date: Nov 2005
Age: 66
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
, Yup and he/she has gotten almost 5K views with this dramatic thread in their first posting. Alot of folks believing his story and some others not (myself included). The photo's prove his/she had access to a 4G TL but does not prove the problems exist. Knowing how modern cars are assembled and tested along with all the process and procedures I cannot believe his tales.I struggle someone is that naive (stupid?) to plunk down 40 large on a car and do basically no research on it. If that is the case, you can remove the "?" from the word "stupid".
10-07-2008, 01:01 PM
#83
, Yup and he/she has gotten almost 5K views with this dramatic thread in their first posting. Alot of folks believing his story and some others not (myself included). The photo's prove his/she had access to a 4G TL but does not prove the problems exist. Knowing how modern cars are assembled and tested along with all the process and procedures I cannot believe his tales.
10-07-2008, 01:41 PM
#84
Advanced
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
(SAID WITH LOVE) Not to slam the moderators or anything but those pictures he provided dont prove anything. I have let people get into my 4G and take pictures with a camera phone. The car is amazing for the price. And to be an 09', there should be no question on the price tag. The technology in the car cant be found in any other car for that price. I mean, I had a 3G TL and wanted an 09' MDX. I drove everything on the lot before I made my decision. So, I dont know how one could get themselves in this situation. Even still, you cant please everyone.
The few things that I wish the 4G had but doesn't: ventilated front seats, auto-dimming and power-folding outside mirrors, and bi-xenons, but that's pretty much it. Some or all of these features are on C, 3, and IS, btw. The Audi RS4 has some of these too but I'm not sure if the A4 has them or not.
As a biased 3G owner, I absolutely love my car and still get head-turns (probably because I have an LED-lit interior). And aside from routine maintenance and a few (fixed) recalls, I had no problems with my car whatsoever. Even the Accord (upon which the TL is based) is an excellent car for the money.
10-07-2008, 07:09 PM
#85
Three Wheelin'
Um, not to slam you or anything but the only things that come to mind that are unique to the '09 TL are the Doppler radar and the SH-AWD system, which is a proprietary brand. (Yeah, I know there have been rave reviews about it but let's not get into a debate about SH-AWD vs. Quattro, etc.) Mercedes, BMW, Lexus, and Infiniti all offer some or more of these TL features/options in the C, 3, IS, and G, respectively for around the $40K to $45K price range.
The few things that I wish the 4G had but doesn't: ventilated front seats, auto-dimming and power-folding outside mirrors, and bi-xenons, but that's pretty much it. Some or all of these features are on C, 3, and IS, btw. The Audi RS4 has some of these too but I'm not sure if the A4 has them or not.
As a biased 3G owner, I absolutely love my car and still get head-turns (probably because I have an LED-lit interior). And aside from routine maintenance and a few (fixed) recalls, I had no problems with my car whatsoever. Even the Accord (upon which the TL is based) is an excellent car for the money.
The few things that I wish the 4G had but doesn't: ventilated front seats, auto-dimming and power-folding outside mirrors, and bi-xenons, but that's pretty much it. Some or all of these features are on C, 3, and IS, btw. The Audi RS4 has some of these too but I'm not sure if the A4 has them or not.
As a biased 3G owner, I absolutely love my car and still get head-turns (probably because I have an LED-lit interior). And aside from routine maintenance and a few (fixed) recalls, I had no problems with my car whatsoever. Even the Accord (upon which the TL is based) is an excellent car for the money.
For the price of the TL Tech ($39K), none of the other brands you've mentioned comes even close to its combination of power, features, fuel economy, and solid reliability. (The closest....the G35 is a great value, but that car emphasizes sport more than luxury...and reliability isn't as good as Acura/Honda). The problem with the German cars (and Lexus) is that to get one of the desirable options you want, you have to check off a whole slew of different "packages" which sends the sticker sky high. On the 4G TL, just the Tech package gives you everything. For example, on the '09 Audi A4, if you want Bluetooth or heated seats, you have to get the Premium Plus package...a $5K option! If you want Navigation, you have to get the Prestige Package.....a $7K option!...plus another $2500 for the NAV! To get the S-line package on the A4, once again, you have to first get the $7K Prestige Package! So a fully loaded 4-cyl. '09 A4, will total out at a shocking $49K!
10-08-2008, 04:50 AM
#86
Sorry to hear about your car but here is some advice
1. NEVER BE HARD ON A NEW MOTOR SUSPENSION AND TRANS you gotta let it break in, once it gets past it's first oil change you should be alright
2. Blasting a new stereo is a GREAT WAY to damage the speakers as they are still stiff and need to be broken in as well
3. as for your pictures, get that stuff fixed (panel gaps) and part of your MIDS appears to be blocked
1. NEVER BE HARD ON A NEW MOTOR SUSPENSION AND TRANS you gotta let it break in, once it gets past it's first oil change you should be alright
2. Blasting a new stereo is a GREAT WAY to damage the speakers as they are still stiff and need to be broken in as well
3. as for your pictures, get that stuff fixed (panel gaps) and part of your MIDS appears to be blocked
10-08-2008, 02:53 PM
#87
For the price of the TL Tech ($39K), none of the other brands you've mentioned comes even close to its combination of power, features, fuel economy, and solid reliability. (The closest....the G35 is a great value, but that car emphasizes sport more than luxury...and reliability isn't as good as Acura/Honda). The problem with the German cars (and Lexus) is that to get one of the desirable options you want, you have to check off a whole slew of different "packages" which sends the sticker sky high. On the 4G TL, just the Tech package gives you everything. For example, on the '09 Audi A4, if you want Bluetooth or heated seats, you have to get the Premium Plus package...a $5K option! If you want Navigation, you have to get the Prestige Package.....a $7K option!...plus another $2500 for the NAV! To get the S-line package on the A4, once again, you have to first get the $7K Prestige Package! So a fully loaded 4-cyl. '09 A4, will total out at a shocking $49K!
Unless i am doing something wrong, if you go to the Audi USA site you can price out a comparable A4 2.0T for just over 44K and a base Tech 09 TL is just over 40K when you add the some accessories which are standard on the A4 (ie Backup sensors, cargo hooks etc etc)
4K difference gets you the 6sp DSG, Bang & Olufsen Sound system, AWD, 19" wheels, Bi-Xenon auto leveling lights plus lots of other little luxury accessories (ie Auto sensing wipers, up/dwn power windows on all windows, better materials) etc etc.
The 2.0T is a much smaller but extremely efficient engine and actually has the same 0-60 times as the 09 TL and obviously better fuel consumption. Although i am not a big fan of CR they even highly recommend the A4 with drastically improved reliability.
Overall the New A4 actually seems like a better value and when you compare the SH-AWD with HPT (6sp) to the 3.2L A4 there is still only a 3K difference.
The only way you can get a 50K A4 2.0T is if you add the S-line pkg, Adaptive cruise and other items not even offered by Acura.
I never bothered to check BMW or MB but i am sure they are similar.
BTW. you only need the Premium Plus Pkg to get the Nav Pkg and then there is only about $500 difference between the two. Although then each has its positive and negatives on STD options although the Audi still has AWD and DSG.
10-08-2008, 05:52 PM
#88
Mpunk actually has a valid point.
Unless i am doing something wrong, if you go to the Audi USA site you can price out a comparable A4 2.0T for just over 44K and a base Tech 09 TL is just over 40K when you add the some accessories which are standard on the A4 (ie Backup sensors, cargo hooks etc etc)
4K difference gets you the 6sp DSG, Bang & Olufsen Sound system, AWD, 19" wheels, Bi-Xenon auto leveling lights plus lots of other little luxury accessories (ie Auto sensing wipers, up/dwn power windows on all windows, better materials) etc etc.
The 2.0T is a much smaller but extremely efficient engine and actually has the same 0-60 times as the 09 TL and obviously better fuel consumption. Although i am not a big fan of CR they even highly recommend the A4 with drastically improved reliability.
Overall the New A4 actually seems like a better value and when you compare the SH-AWD with HPT (6sp) to the 3.2L A4 there is still only a 3K difference.
The only way you can get a 50K A4 2.0T is if you add the S-line pkg, Adaptive cruise and other items not even offered by Acura.
I never bothered to check BMW or MB but i am sure they are similar.
BTW. you only need the Premium Plus Pkg to get the Nav Pkg and then there is only about $500 difference between the two. Although then each has its positive and negatives on STD options although the Audi still has AWD and DSG.
Unless i am doing something wrong, if you go to the Audi USA site you can price out a comparable A4 2.0T for just over 44K and a base Tech 09 TL is just over 40K when you add the some accessories which are standard on the A4 (ie Backup sensors, cargo hooks etc etc)
4K difference gets you the 6sp DSG, Bang & Olufsen Sound system, AWD, 19" wheels, Bi-Xenon auto leveling lights plus lots of other little luxury accessories (ie Auto sensing wipers, up/dwn power windows on all windows, better materials) etc etc.
The 2.0T is a much smaller but extremely efficient engine and actually has the same 0-60 times as the 09 TL and obviously better fuel consumption. Although i am not a big fan of CR they even highly recommend the A4 with drastically improved reliability.
Overall the New A4 actually seems like a better value and when you compare the SH-AWD with HPT (6sp) to the 3.2L A4 there is still only a 3K difference.
The only way you can get a 50K A4 2.0T is if you add the S-line pkg, Adaptive cruise and other items not even offered by Acura.
I never bothered to check BMW or MB but i am sure they are similar.
BTW. you only need the Premium Plus Pkg to get the Nav Pkg and then there is only about $500 difference between the two. Although then each has its positive and negatives on STD options although the Audi still has AWD and DSG.
very well put.
10-08-2008, 07:42 PM
#89
Three Wheelin'
Mpunk actually has a valid point.
Unless i am doing something wrong, if you go to the Audi USA site you can price out a comparable A4 2.0T for just over 44K and a base Tech 09 TL is just over 40K when you add the some accessories which are standard on the A4 (ie Backup sensors, cargo hooks etc etc)
4K difference gets you the 6sp DSG, Bang & Olufsen Sound system, AWD, 19" wheels, Bi-Xenon auto leveling lights plus lots of other little luxury accessories (ie Auto sensing wipers, up/dwn power windows on all windows, better materials) etc etc.
The 2.0T is a much smaller but extremely efficient engine and actually has the same 0-60 times as the 09 TL and obviously better fuel consumption. Although i am not a big fan of CR they even highly recommend the A4 with drastically improved reliability.
Overall the New A4 actually seems like a better value and when you compare the SH-AWD with HPT (6sp) to the 3.2L A4 there is still only a 3K difference.
The only way you can get a 50K A4 2.0T is if you add the S-line pkg, Adaptive cruise and other items not even offered by Acura.
I never bothered to check BMW or MB but i am sure they are similar.
BTW. you only need the Premium Plus Pkg to get the Nav Pkg and then there is only about $500 difference between the two. Although then each has its positive and negatives on STD options although the Audi still has AWD and DSG.
Unless i am doing something wrong, if you go to the Audi USA site you can price out a comparable A4 2.0T for just over 44K and a base Tech 09 TL is just over 40K when you add the some accessories which are standard on the A4 (ie Backup sensors, cargo hooks etc etc)
4K difference gets you the 6sp DSG, Bang & Olufsen Sound system, AWD, 19" wheels, Bi-Xenon auto leveling lights plus lots of other little luxury accessories (ie Auto sensing wipers, up/dwn power windows on all windows, better materials) etc etc.
The 2.0T is a much smaller but extremely efficient engine and actually has the same 0-60 times as the 09 TL and obviously better fuel consumption. Although i am not a big fan of CR they even highly recommend the A4 with drastically improved reliability.
Overall the New A4 actually seems like a better value and when you compare the SH-AWD with HPT (6sp) to the 3.2L A4 there is still only a 3K difference.
The only way you can get a 50K A4 2.0T is if you add the S-line pkg, Adaptive cruise and other items not even offered by Acura.
I never bothered to check BMW or MB but i am sure they are similar.
BTW. you only need the Premium Plus Pkg to get the Nav Pkg and then there is only about $500 difference between the two. Although then each has its positive and negatives on STD options although the Audi still has AWD and DSG.
10-09-2008, 02:30 AM
#90
You have some details messed up. The '09 Audi A4 2.0T with the $7K "Prestige Package" does NOT come with 19" wheels...you have to add the $1450 Sports Package or S-line to that. The 6sp DSG is not even offered yet on the A4. Also, 0-60 times of the 4GTL are not even officially published yet, but I would bet it's faster than the 2.0T or the 3.2 V6. My point is, for $39K out the door for the TL Tech, you can't anything close as far as performance and content. I test drove the new A4 several times before I got my TL......the A4 is definately a sweet car...but to get a lot of stuff which is standard on the TL Tech, you have to go well over $40K to get it .....and in that price range, there are a lot of other cars to choose from (and paying over $40K for a 4 cyl just didn't sound right to me).
0-60 for the 3.5L is around 6.8 sec while the 2.0T is 6.7 sec and their are lots of articles out there that show this....The 3.2L is around 6.3 Sec Although im sure the TL's 3.7L should be in the Mid 5 Sec range.
As far as the Prestige Pkg goes i included the sports pkg in that 4K difference as it also includes the sports seats etc just so they where comparable otherwise its wouldnt be a far comparison to the TL which has them Std in the tech Pkg.
I guess in the end we both agree to disagree. My point is that there is other cars out there around that price range with same or better value. The way Audi packages their lineup you have to pay 4K more to match the Std items on the TL Tech but at the same time its also exceeding what the TL has giving the Audi better value....Quattro alone is a 4K upgrade, without mentioning the other items in my previous post. You could get the premium Plus Pkg with the 18" wheels and the Nav without the Bang&Olufsen system for 41K and then there is only 1K difference between the two. The A4 though would still have AWD giving it a better value still.
Comparing the 6sp Tech SH-AWD (HPT) to the A4 3.2L maybe a different story though...we'll have to wait and see.....
Sorry about highjackin this thread guys, we'll try and divert it back to the original topic.
10-09-2008, 04:45 AM
#91
10-11-2008, 02:20 PM
#93
He is not lying. I test drove the 09 TL. And it was abit slower then my Base 08 TL. But the ride was alright. Also no diff in audio system both els's were piece of crap. And did i forgot this is 1 very ugly car. When i was test driving it, ppl were like frowning getting disguisted at how ugly the car was.
10-11-2008, 02:59 PM
#94
He is not lying. I test drove the 09 TL. And it was abit slower then my Base 08 TL. But the ride was alright. Also no diff in audio system both els's were piece of crap. And did i forgot this is 1 very ugly car. When i was test driving it, ppl were like frowning getting disguisted at how ugly the car was.
ELS is an extremely accurate audio system. A well designed audio system does not 'make' more bass if none was present in the recorded material. Measured this way, the ELS system is one of the best out there and others agree:
From Car Audio Review in 2003:
...but hitting the gas while blasting Queen's A Night at the Opera or listening to The Beach Boys' rock classic Pet Sounds in 5.1 made for the perfect Sunday drive -- at a pleasant 95 miles an hour...This DVD-Audio system, developed with Grammy-winning music producer Elliot Scheiner (see interview), does for the car what, for most people, home theater in a box does for home entertainment.
From Cars.com in 2009:
This is much more than just a car stereo. It's an acoustic wonder with 10 speakers, a 12.7-gigabyte hard drive and 440 watts of power. Elliot Scheiner, the Grammy-winning producer and sound engineer, personally spent weeks in Ohio fine-tuning the stereo on test tracks so the sound would be perfect. It is. The sacrifice of anyone spending more than a day in Ohio shows dedication only an engineer is willing to endure.
In case you think you have a better ear than Mr. Scheiner, there's a digital equalizer. But if I were you, I'd just leave it alone; you don't have a better ear.
In case you think you have a better ear than Mr. Scheiner, there's a digital equalizer. But if I were you, I'd just leave it alone; you don't have a better ear.
If however, you measure 'quality' as 'louder is better' than you will find you need to go with the aftermarket. In this case no factory system will ever suit you.
10-11-2008, 11:45 PM
#97
Senior Moderator
iTrader: (1)
2008 TL 3632 pounds: http://www.hondanews.com/search/rele...tumble&s=acura
2009 TL (Base): 3699 pounds: (acura.com)
258hp vs. 280hp
2009 TL (Base): 3699 pounds: (acura.com)
258hp vs. 280hp
10-12-2008, 01:05 AM
#98
steeez
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: san jose cali
Age: 34
Posts: 1,708
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
so can we conclude the op was a fake? would other competing companies really do this? lol i mean, come to a forum and dog on a car so it might sway others away from buying it?
sad
sad
10-12-2008, 06:02 AM
#99
2008 TL 3632 pounds: http://www.hondanews.com/search/rele...tumble&s=acura
2009 TL (Base): 3699 pounds: (acura.com)
258hp vs. 280hp
2009 TL (Base): 3699 pounds: (acura.com)
258hp vs. 280hp
10-12-2008, 08:57 AM
#100
Bears Rule!(Well, kinda')
Colin, as an audiophile I'd like to say that many of the points you bring up from the mags are correct in reference to the ELS system in our 3G TLs. That being said, the speakers used in the TL combined with that head unit from Panasonic doesn't give the proverbial "punch" that many look for.
I think you've fallen into the trap of thinking that "punch" and clarity are mutually exclusive. They certainly aren't.
I still have to check out the 4G, but I certainly hope theat Mr Scheiner and co. take another nice jump up this go-round.
I think you've fallen into the trap of thinking that "punch" and clarity are mutually exclusive. They certainly aren't.
I still have to check out the 4G, but I certainly hope theat Mr Scheiner and co. take another nice jump up this go-round.
10-12-2008, 12:22 PM
#101
Suzuka Master
iTrader: (2)
I don't see how 280 hp in a 3600 lb car is going to be slower than 258 in a 3500 lb car. I know that the engine was very fresh and not 'loosened' up yet, but the new car is definitely faster. Its also quieter so this might make it seem slower, but it's not.
ELS is an extremely accurate audio system. A well designed audio system does not 'make' more bass if none was present in the recorded material. Measured this way, the ELS system is one of the best out there and others agree:
From Car Audio Review in 2003:
Full Article:http://www.caraudiomag.com/soundstyle/0312cae_acura_tl/index.html
From Cars.com in 2009:
Full Article:http://www.cars.com/go/crp/research....&revlogtype=22
If however, you measure 'quality' as 'louder is better' than you will find you need to go with the aftermarket. In this case no factory system will ever suit you.
ELS is an extremely accurate audio system. A well designed audio system does not 'make' more bass if none was present in the recorded material. Measured this way, the ELS system is one of the best out there and others agree:
From Car Audio Review in 2003:
Full Article:http://www.caraudiomag.com/soundstyle/0312cae_acura_tl/index.html
From Cars.com in 2009:
Full Article:http://www.cars.com/go/crp/research....&revlogtype=22
If however, you measure 'quality' as 'louder is better' than you will find you need to go with the aftermarket. In this case no factory system will ever suit you.
10-12-2008, 12:33 PM
#102
Suzuka Master
iTrader: (2)
I'm still under the impression that this guy is on the BMW payroll and is just supposed to give our car a bad reputation. His car will more than likely be reverse engineered and used to improve the next BMW 3 or 5 Series. All competitor's have probably picked up a new TL so they can break it down and copy it's interior and technology just like with the 3G. Culprits include the CTS, G35, and others.
I'm sure BMW and Infiniti execs are just dying to copy Acura's front wheel drivetrain. In fact, they're probably losing sleep over it.
10-12-2008, 01:49 PM
#103
Advanced
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: orlando
Age: 38
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
sounds to me like you have no clue what the hell your talking about! u probably work for another dealership or something. how are u gonna compare a new tl to a garbageass chevy truck? i wanna see pics....!
10-12-2008, 01:52 PM
#104
Trap? Yes and no. The stock audio system is very good, among the best out there. However, as I said earlier, if you really want to 'go big' you have to go aftermarket. The point I was trying to make is that although its not perfect, it's (very) far from the "piece of crap" that TL|GTX was claiming. Honestly, whenever I see someone complaining about stereo quality while using MP3s I cringe...most people have no idea what good sound is.
10-12-2008, 01:53 PM
#105
Three Wheelin'
The guy is just a troll....nothing complicated about that. When I used to have a 5 series several years ago, we had several so-called 5 series "owners" in the Roadfly forums who claimed the cars fell apart on them very shortly after delivery. They posted all kinds of false B.S. about the car saying that the engine blew apart, wheels coming off, "slower than a Mack truck," etc.etc....just like this O.P., those so-called "owners" never defended their claims. I can understand if guys are not happy with the styling on a car, but to go through the trouble of making stuff up and posting them as fact and trying to dissuade people from making up their own minds is ridiculous to me.
10-12-2008, 01:55 PM
#106
10-12-2008, 04:36 PM
#107
Team Owner
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Kansas City, MO (Overland Park, KS)
Posts: 36,545
Received 6,470 Likes
on
5,162 Posts
10-12-2008, 07:03 PM
#108
Bears Rule!(Well, kinda')
>>Honestly, whenever I see someone complaining about stereo quality while using MP3s I cringe...most people have no idea what good sound is.<<
Verrrrrry true. All my digial stuff is at 320 or lossless. (Save a few things that have come my way from friends, per se...)
That's why I use my XM pretty much for the comedy channel and to "mine" for new music here and there. I write stuff down then get the CDs down the line if I like it enough. XM's sound quality is so bad I fear getting ear cancer when listening.
The stock system is quite good, no argument. Again, I really hope they step it up again and make the 4th gen as much of a leap as 2nd to 3rd was.
Verrrrrry true. All my digial stuff is at 320 or lossless. (Save a few things that have come my way from friends, per se...)
That's why I use my XM pretty much for the comedy channel and to "mine" for new music here and there. I write stuff down then get the CDs down the line if I like it enough. XM's sound quality is so bad I fear getting ear cancer when listening.
The stock system is quite good, no argument. Again, I really hope they step it up again and make the 4th gen as much of a leap as 2nd to 3rd was.
10-12-2008, 07:46 PM
#109
Black
Since this turned into an "A4 vs. TL" discussion, here is my feedback:
Having OWNED both of the last generation (not just "configuring one on such-and-such-dot-com"), the TL is NOWHERE near any Audi product on quality of materials (interior odor, leather quality, etc.). The RL comes closer, btw.
Features:
With that said, the 3G TL had a large touch-screen navigation system when the A4 had nothing. Zilch. The TL also had things like redundant steering-wheel controls when they were part of expensive packages on the A4.
The Audi had simple things like fold-down rear seats and the incomperable (in my opinion) quattro mechanical all-wheel drive system ("quattro" on the TT / A3 is a different Haldex system).
Price:
I've never paid MSRP for an Audi. I did indeed do my TL lease on MSRP since it was brand new (but my RL and RDX leases were nowhere near MSRP).
The point is - don't just go with MSRP since it's irrelevant.
Having OWNED both of the last generation (not just "configuring one on such-and-such-dot-com"), the TL is NOWHERE near any Audi product on quality of materials (interior odor, leather quality, etc.). The RL comes closer, btw.
Features:
With that said, the 3G TL had a large touch-screen navigation system when the A4 had nothing. Zilch. The TL also had things like redundant steering-wheel controls when they were part of expensive packages on the A4.
The Audi had simple things like fold-down rear seats and the incomperable (in my opinion) quattro mechanical all-wheel drive system ("quattro" on the TT / A3 is a different Haldex system).
Price:
I've never paid MSRP for an Audi. I did indeed do my TL lease on MSRP since it was brand new (but my RL and RDX leases were nowhere near MSRP).
The point is - don't just go with MSRP since it's irrelevant.
10-13-2008, 12:40 AM
#111
Trap? Yes and no. The stock audio system is very good, among the best out there. However, as I said earlier, if you really want to 'go big' you have to go aftermarket. The point I was trying to make is that although its not perfect, it's (very) far from the "piece of crap" that TL|GTX was claiming. Honestly, whenever I see someone complaining about stereo quality while using MP3s I cringe...most people have no idea what good sound is.
10-13-2008, 01:24 AM
#112
JDM Addict
10-13-2008, 08:58 AM
#113
AZ Community Team
Mp3
Alot of talk on here for MP3 sound quality but there is a extremely important factor here. MP3's encoders use different settings and some variations in the DSP (sub-band coding esspecially) which follow the basic MP3 algorithm. There are many settings for quality far beyond sampling rate and bit rate. I've heard some 192kbps and 224 kbps sound worst than 128kbps so not all MP3's are equal in quality.
If you use a high quality ripper (such as CDEX) then I doubt anyone could tell the difference between the original source and a CDEX'ed ripped 224kbps with the high quality (q=7?) setting even with accurate headphones. Most of my collection is ripped to 192kbps and I cannot tell any difference. Alot of older MP3's that I got ripped in the late 90's do not sound good as good as more current encoders. Two MP3's of the same datarate and sample rate of the same song/sound are not necessary equal. One may sound significatly better than the other.
If you use a high quality ripper (such as CDEX) then I doubt anyone could tell the difference between the original source and a CDEX'ed ripped 224kbps with the high quality (q=7?) setting even with accurate headphones. Most of my collection is ripped to 192kbps and I cannot tell any difference. Alot of older MP3's that I got ripped in the late 90's do not sound good as good as more current encoders. Two MP3's of the same datarate and sample rate of the same song/sound are not necessary equal. One may sound significatly better than the other.
10-13-2008, 10:05 PM
#114
Cruisin'
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Canton, OH
Age: 44
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
though this post seems all over the place, I will say that the RJ photo(shop?) made the car look better, but I don't know if I will look for a 4G when my 3G lease is up, and shouldn't have to get a body kit to make my new car look good from the start, it's to enhance what I already like. I don't think that front end is attractive at all, and in different angles it looks kinda like a Lexus ES. I think overall the 3G was a better value which is why I bought it over the other brands. As previously stated, to get an apples to apples car in 06 when I bought mine, the Bimmer and Merc where touching 40k, and my car was 33k ish. I haven't seen a 4G in person or driven one, I'm just going off of magazine pics, maybe my opinion will change when I stroll past the dealership. I think overall Acura is a solid value and good quality, just a little lacking in styling, save my 3G Aspec with tint and rims on the way, IMO.
10-13-2008, 10:12 PM
#115
Cruisin'
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Canton, OH
Age: 44
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the stereo is pretty decent for factory having had a serious stereo in my last vehicle. It wasn't set up to vibrate the streets, but rather play my music loud and clean.
My system was Alpine head unit, MB Quart & Diamond components F/R and 2 JL subs, with 3 amps powering the system. It takes a fair bit of cash to get bass and clarity at high volumes, and the factory just isn't going to produce it. You have to look at your personal preferances for music, and set up your system tailored that way, more than likely from the aftermarket. My 3G stereo is decent, if I keep it, it's getting yanked though. Just my 2 cents
My system was Alpine head unit, MB Quart & Diamond components F/R and 2 JL subs, with 3 amps powering the system. It takes a fair bit of cash to get bass and clarity at high volumes, and the factory just isn't going to produce it. You have to look at your personal preferances for music, and set up your system tailored that way, more than likely from the aftermarket. My 3G stereo is decent, if I keep it, it's getting yanked though. Just my 2 cents
10-16-2008, 12:06 PM
#117
I still call BS. I can get a picture of almost anycar anytime i want since i work in a dealership so that proves nothing to me. You would think if someone was remotely interested in buying a car that they would join a forum and see what owners think ......but this guy conveniently joins after the purchase to bash the car with a peculiar screen name. Nice try tho.
10-16-2008, 12:46 PM
#118
Meat Popsicle
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Chicagoland, Illinois
Posts: 386
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And, of course he could be a happy TL owner with legit photos, and still be having fun playing troll. After all this is going to be about the 120th reply.
I would lend some credibility to the rant until he said the 135hp pick up was faster.
That sounds like rubbish.
I would lend some credibility to the rant until he said the 135hp pick up was faster.
That sounds like rubbish.
10-17-2008, 06:35 PM
#119
Racer
I still call BS. I can get a picture of almost anycar anytime i want since i work in a dealership so that proves nothing to me. You would think if someone was remotely interested in buying a car that they would join a forum and see what owners think ......but this guy conveniently joins after the purchase to bash the car with a peculiar screen name. Nice try tho.
10-17-2008, 07:51 PM
#120
Senior Moderator
My goodness, this thread has turned into quite a waste of bandwidth. Time to shut 'er down.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
DerrickW
3G TL Performance Parts & Modifications
20
09-27-2015 02:45 PM
