jharrison

ever since the 2012 was released i've been waiting for an updated 0-60 time for the SH-AWD auto because the 2011 was too slow. Most tests put the 2011 at 6.2 - 6.5 for 0-60. according to motorweek, the 2012 auto is 0-60 in 5.5. this would represent a significant improvement and i would be excited except for their statement that this is "unchanged" from previous tests. I don't understand this since i have never seen a 2011 or any other 4th generation SH-AWD auto at anything less than 5.9. Any other insights?

Stew4HD

?? Sorry to break the news to you.. the TL is not a race car... it's a luxary sports sedan.. just wanted clarify that

jasonwdp10

Putting in a new transmission doesn't automatically make the car faster. It did, however, make the car feel smoother and slighty more driveable.

Stew4HD

it feels quick of the line with that lower 1st gear... it just wants to go!

jjsC5

I don't read Motorweek - do you know for sure if they tested it? A lot of preview articles either take MFR data or they estimate times.

winstrolvtec

Motorweek says it's "unchanged" but if you look at their 2009 page, it reads as though they might have estimated the 0-60 time. They said they expected 0-60 times of 5.5 seconds and then for the 2012 test, they say it's unchanged. It's rather strange.

It's possible (but doubtful) they actually got a 5.5 for the 09 but the wording is off and then got the same thing for the 2012. Or they only guessed at the 09 and then actually tested a 5.5 for the 2012. Or maybe they tested nothing and just put down whatever. We will never really know for sure.

As we know the 09 has "officially" tested a best of 0-60 in 5.9 seconds. There have been a few unofficial and independent 5.5's and 5.6s I believe but it's not the same equipment or calibration. I don't think an official best of 5.5 is completely out of the question for the 6AT being that the 5AT has done a 5.9. Worst case, it shouldn't be any worse.

Don't get too hung up on the numbers though. The 5AT doesn't brake torque properly so the best thing to do is hit the gas using sport mode and shift yourself. I suppose the 6AT upshifts to 2nd when you try to brake torque as well but maybe a 12' owner can comment but regardless, a brake torque time usually reads a bit lower than one that doesn't so long as they used a 1 ft rollout and most tests do. So keep in mind a 5.9 on a car that doesn't brake torque is really a little lower when compared to a car that does.

jharrison

STEW4HD's post below isn't helpful. if 0-60 is important to me in a sports sedan, i don't need someone reminding me of the obvious (that the TL is not a race car".

jjsC5

As you know I've driven both the SH and the FWD cars twice this week. The FWD car has a hesitation from a dead stop that the SH does not have. I'm guessing it has some torque management built in to the FWD car to keep torque-steer in check from a dead stop. Has anyone else noticed this?

Stew4HD

LOL... I was sure you needed someone to point out the obvious... The TL has never been touted as a speed demon with quick 0-60 times... *shrug*

The '12 can get out of its own way but is probably one of the slowest in its class. If 0-60 times and 1/4 mile speeds are so important... then this car isn't for you.. again... Mr. Obvious here

If you want a great daily driver that is nimble and holds its value, is reliable and all that good stuff.. then this is the car you want.

maybe the Subaru WRX is what you are looking for...

Edward'TLS

Due to the extra forward gear, the new 6AT for the 2012 TL has much more closer gear ratios than the previous 5AT. Closer gear ratios automatically translate into faster acceleration times, because then the engine rpm won't fall off as much when upshifting to the next higher gears.

Provided that the curb weight of the MMC 6AT TL is not significantly heavier than the pre-MMC 5AT TL, the MMC TL will definitely have faster acceleration times. The question is how much faster.

In the case with the 2G TL, the 2009 TL was debuted with the 4AT. The following year, Acura replaced the 4AT with the 5AT, as in the 2010+ TL. The 2009 4AT TL and the 2010+ 5AT TL were exactly identical cars, except with one extra forward gear for the latter.

The factory information stated that the 5AT TL was 0.5 second faster in the 0-60 time, as compared to the 4AT car.

23109VC

i would think the 6AT is faster.... but how much faster???

yes, the TL is *NOT* a drag car... but most people shopping a TL don't want an EVO or WRX... those cars may be quicker, but they are boy racer econoboxes....

if you want the luxury of a TL but more speed...a lot more speed.. you n eed to look at 335i, M3, S4, etc...and you're going to pay a LOT more for those cars...and get LESS reliability. you ALWAYS pay to play... nothing in life is free.. with cars, that is always the case.

if money was coming out of my a$$, I'd buy an M5.... I'd get the luxyry and room of my RL.... and the power to rip the headlights out of most anything on the road... but the only M5 I can afford... is one that will break down and cost me an arm and leg.. so I'll keep my RL... a TL SH-AWD is probably one of thge best "jack of all trades" out there in the luxury sport sedan market.... it's not the fastest..but it's fast enouhg to have fun... if you reeally need to be out drag racing and whooping people... buy a Z06 or something like that...

i'd still be really interested to see a very objective ad accurate appraisal of how much faster the new 6AT car is vs the last year 5AT...

saturno_v

The 335 or the S4 are not that much faster than a TL...and yes, you pay much more...and they are smaller...

The M5 has always been one of my favorite cars...a comfortable sedan capable of ripping off even some serius exotic...power and practicality....but, until now, I would nto buy one because of the RWD....but the new one look like a killer...V8 dual turbos, definitely more than 500 HP (the last one was 507) AWD (xDrive)...my real dream car...hopefully they will make one with a traditional manual transmission option.

zman19

I would disagree with that statement. If your talking auto trannys...than both the 335 and the DCT equipped S4 are significantly quicker. The gap narrows with the manual tranny TL...

jjsC5

BMW has been good about still offering manual trannies. But I walk car lots quite often, and you can hardly even find a M3 on any of the lots with a manual anymore. I'm afraid guys like us that want them are a dieing breed. This comes up on the Corvette forum a lot. It seems like the guys who want to drive a manual are the older guys (like me )

TechnoCat

As a percentage, the 335 and S4 are enormously faster than the TL. And they are smaller. And a Porsche 911 Carrera is faster, more expensive and smaller still. What does "smaller" have to do with the thread? The Audi and BMW can both hold a fully-assembled weed whacker, the Acura cannot.

iforyou

iTrader: (1)

You mean 1999 TL and 2000 TL?

Edward'TLS

Yes, thanks for the correction.

saturno_v

Please explain...tell me what you mean by "enormously"...they are not...faster yes but not by that much...and, again, they are smaller and lighter...

The only direct comparison that I know between the 3 (TL SH-AWD, 335, S4) done by C&D and Edmunds, the TL was faster on a track...a bit slower on straight line acceleration.


We are talking about the TL in this thread and someone brought up the 335 or the S4....that is the reason why I specified that these two are smaller.

TechnoCat

It took some effort to find comparable numbers, meaning real world tests, since the Germans are known to under-rate. These are real-world tests, not manufacturer numbers manipulated for insurance (German) or sales (Acura). They are all from InsideLine road tests.

• 2010 TL SH-AWD Manual: 5.6, TL SH-AWD Automatic: 6.4.
• 0:52 seconds in: Audi S4 6MT: 0-60: 4.9
• 2010 BMW 335 MT: 5.2
• 2008 BMW M3 Sedan: 4.6

So, by InsideLine's tests, the TL SH-AWD is 14% slower than the S4 (5.6/4.9-1), 7.7% slower than the 335 and 28% slower than the 2008 M3. You're right, of course, that enormous is a matter of perspective.

The TL is larger, but that always seems like an odd metric to me; that really should be the first filter on vehicles; if you want a sedan for four 6'4" adults, you don't buy an Audi 4-series or BMW 3-series... or a small convertable or a Porsche Carrera. If you want a four-seater sports-sedan that comfortably fits, say, two 6'2" men and two 6-ft or below adults (most men I know are below 6' and all my women friends are), the TL then has no size advantage because the difference doesn't matter, but retains the cargo disadvantage.

So if you're even talking BMW 335 and Audi S4, presumably you've already run that filter. And you've also presumably accepted that Audi doesn't come with Acura reliability, that any feature-list-comparable German car will cost at least 20% more, and that Acura doesn't come with BMW marque prestige.

zman19

^ And to top it off the 335 and S4 auto are both faster than their respective manual counterparts...thus widening the gap even more. Rarely anyone cross shops manual and automatic transmissions these days. They are ultimately on a different level as far as performance with automatics are concerned and while not enormously different...it's significant enough not to ignore.

saturno_v

It is quite easy to find real world test for them

TL SH-AWD 6 speed MT 0-60 in 5,2 sec ( C&D and Road & Track)

Audi S4 manual, 4,9 C&D and Inside Line, 4.5 Road and Track.

BMW 335, between 4.8 and 5.0 (C&D, Road And Track, Insideline, etc)


So the difference between the TL SH-AWD and the S4 and the 335 (all of them manual) in pure 0-60 acceleration results is, on average, is 10% or less....I would not define that "enormous" by any book.

It is not an odd metric....even a Toyota Corolla is officially e 5 seats automobile....but I can tell you that anyone would feel the difference....even a sub 6 feet person can see and experience the difference, especially at the back, with the TL and the S4 and 335...the TL definitely feels more roomy. you have more legroom, shoulder room.

Furthermore, the bigger dimension of the TL impact his weight, which is higher than both the S4 and the 335 which, in turn, impact performance.

Yes the TL has the rather annoying disadvantage (it is my biggest gripe with the car) that you cannot fold down the rear seats, but in terms of cargo capacity (seats up) is bigger than both the S4 and the 335.


Going back to your weed whacker example.....I can carry an even bigger item on a Kia Rio Cinco (or any small hatchback) compared to an S4 or a 335...that doesn't make the Kia bigger doesn't it??

I tend to compare them at a pricing point...mainly because the specialized press forces that comparison....in my book, the TL should be "naturally" compared to the 535 and the A6/A7....size/performance wise.

saturno_v

I'm not aware of a road test where the auto version of S4 and 335 are faster than their manual counterparts...actually the only road tests I found for these cars are for the manuals.

So I don't know, frankly, how can you make that statement.

George Knighton

That's pretty damned speedy. I don't think I could duplicate that.

I can do a 13.8, but that is not quite the equivalent of a 5.2 0-60. Maybe 5.4 or 5.5? I dunno. Maybe somewhere in there.

winstrolvtec

That’s another selfish, one-sided argument and an interesting way to justify it, but still I agree that type (coupe, sedan, SUV, etc) and size should always be the first filter(s) and in that case, there would not necessarily be a comparison of these cars in the first place.

This idea has also been the basis for the comparisons of the TL to other luxury mid size sedans because that is what it is as well. How well it compares or doesn't in other areas is another discussion. That also happens to be something that you and a few others have had a hard time grasping or just didn't want to accept, for whatever reasons but it seems you do in fact get it after all.

If you remove that “filter“, as most do, then the TL is a larger size and the S4 smaller, no matter what. Those may be advantages or disadvantages depending on the individual. Going even further it may be both or even as you put it, might not really matter depending on the wants and needs of the individual but that is not much different than the S4's fold down seats and cargo in turn, which might not matter as well if it's also not a priority or of use to the individual but you are attempting to automatically generalize it as a disadvantage. Can anybody say double standard?

That could easily be another filter and the same thing goes for the S4’s acceleration. The TL's trunk doesn't fold which clearly seems disadvantageous all by itself, especially to someone who is in need of this feature but it isn’t as simple as that, as there are others who feel differently and instead welcome Acura’s approach to added rigidity which is in large why a car of it’s size handles as well as it does. Personally, I have never needed to place anything that wouldn’t fit in my trunk, in my trunk, nor would I want to. This is also the case for someone not needing a larger sized vehicle so there are no advantages to additional size when clearly more space and larger seating surfaces would be an advantage to almost anyone. Lots of cars seat 4 or 5, how they do so is the difference, it’s not necessarily all about need. Hopefully, you can begin to see that there is more to a car than how it only pertains to us personally.

Back to the trunk, as poorly designed as it seems to some, it still has the advantage of an additional .5 ft of space compared to the S4. A few smaller points are that there is adequate space on the sides of the spare’s cover and cutout so no need to remove smaller items laying around to get to the spare and the fact that it has a flap in the first place which also allows item storage behind the hinge point and the convenience of not having to pull out the whole cover in the event you may actually need to use the spare. There is obviously plenty of cargo advantages in the TL and disadvantages in the S4's as well. This goes back to the point that I just made above.

I believe what Saturno was getting at in the case of the TL here, is that size is generally relative to weight which is relative to the acceleration when you are dealing with similar engine outputs (which we are) as it is also relative to price within the luxury (and mainstream) segments, when you are talking about sedans (which it is).

The TL automatically represents strong value with little room for argument because of it’s size in relation to price which for the same price range and less you simply get more size compared to most. This is an exceptional case because even if one doesn’t want or need a larger car and one doesn’t place much value into added size, the industry already dictates that a premium is warranted for the larger sedan size or the next size up, which in this case it is.

This is different than size all by itself or size between different types of vehicles, which doesn’t necessarily mean anything. We are talking about it’s relation to the segmenting and positioning of sedans. Where there is a standard of small, medium and large, best known as compact, mid sized and full sized. Whether a brand decides to offer a product for all of these ranges is besides the point, this standardization still exists. Every move up commands more of a premium. It’s true that the price basis is not necessarily size alone but that is a large part of it, it costs more to build and engineer “more” regardless of engine, tranny, and content.

As far as the acceleration goes in this case, I do not believe that the additional size, weight and usual reduction of aerodynamics is the only factor at play. The TL is down on torque here and number of gears for the AT as well, which accounts for a lot but it’s size and those aspects relative to it make up a significant portion of the acceleration gap. That’s why in this way, the TL has proven to match up better against other mid size sedans.

And I agree that to most people Acura doesn’t come with BMW like prestige and probably never will but that doesn’t matter if one doesn’t care about that sort of thing anyway.

saturno_v

And I hope it stays that way...I do not want to pay extra dollars for brand prestige...I work too hard for my money to squander it for such irrational and meaningless (IMHO) aspect.

I never did and I never will buy a car for its brand...I evaluate a vehicle on its specific merits.....being a Kia or a Mercedes it doesn't really matter to me....

Ruby

This guy again??

Stew4HD

Yep.. doesn't own a TL and has a physics degree... An expert...?

zman19

BMW 335 auto test - faster by a hair(or maybe even equivalent) but still much quicker compared to the auto TL....

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...take_road_test

I won't bother finding a DCT S4 review since those are pretty easy to find.

Whichever numbers you compare...the german autos are consistently in the high 4's and the Acura TL auto is consistently low 6's. Thats pretty significant especially as your speed increases at which point the gap becomes much larger.

The manual TL can hold its own, but the autos are just in a different class altogether.

I currently have an auto 2007 TL-S and a 2011 Audi S4 DCT and its easily a night and day difference...no question. Reliability may be an issue down the road....but I probably won't keep it past its seven year extended warranty.

saturno_v

The 335 auto test drive you posted is a coupe...I don't know if the gear ratio is exactly the same as the sedan but for sure is 30-40 pounds lighter than the sedan...and the acceleration is identical (0-60 in 4,9) to the 335i sedan...actually some manual 335i sedan did the 0-60 in 4,7-4,8 on some tests.

I know that the TL SH-AWD 5 speed auto is in the mid 6 (I own a manual TL anyway), in that case I think this performance is justified because of less gears.
However C&D was able to get as low as 6.0 0-60 time with the 2009 automatic TL SH-AWD

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

You cannot compare a Dual Clutch transmission to an automatic transmission with a standard torque converter...you are comparing apples to oranges...the DCT doesn't have the losses of a torque converter and it is actually lighting fast in the gear change...usually a DCT transission is even quicker than a classic manual gearbox... and on top of that with 7 speed you can have extra lower gears for quicker acceleration.


However I admit I'm a bit disappointed with the acceleration numbers of the new 2012 TL which has an extra gear (still in low 6s for 0-60).....but you have also to consider that a heavier car with a standard torque converter is particularly penalized in off the line acceleration because of the bigger inertia...what I mean to say is that, for example, in a 3 series when you switch from manual to auto you probably pay a smaller price in pure acceleration performance compared to the same situation with a TL.

cp3117

This has already been discussed in another thread but i see some still think that the 2009 may have been actually tested by motorweek.

Here is the original that was aired back in 2009 that I hope clearly shows that the times where estimated.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ealjdoNW0F4

As mentioned in a previous thread also, I wouldnt put to much weight into the brake torque theory as being a huge disadvantage for the 4G. Many vehicles have the same issues these days and most publications try to get the best results possible from various testing methods.

iforyou

iTrader: (1)

I read the motorweek test for the 2009 TL and in the 0-60mph section, it says clearly that it's "estimated."

However, for the 2012 model, it doesn't say "estimated."

May be they were able to actually get 5.5s for the 2012 model, and then they compared that number to the estimated figure for the 2009 model?

ZCL

How can anyone suggest the 335 and the s4 are not significantly faster than the TL, especially in auto form.

I love my TL but let's get real, it's slow comparatively.

jasonwdp10

Exactly. While the TL SHAWD 6MT can edge out competitors by a few seconds on the track, in the real world, where straight line > handling, the TL loses every time, esp in auto.

But no need to listen guys, keep arguing for those extra .2-.3 seconds so you can be happy about the TL still being slower than the competition!

Stew4HD

LOL! The TL is still not a race car............

Edward'TLS

The TL is no ordinary sport sedan either.

The torque-vectoring feature in the SH-AWD allows the TL to be more than just a regular sport sedan. That feature allows the TL to take corners at even higher speeds than some so-called race cars.

The only thing is that the TL could use more hp. 30 more hp would be perfect.

jasonwdp10

I wish the TL was 300-400lb lighter. I think that would be better than adding 30hp

iforyou

iTrader: (1)

slap that Comptech Supercharger on for 60 more whp or something.....upgrade the brakes, and make the suspension even tighter.

Call that a Type S and everyone will be happy.