Stew4HD

Well, there we have it. It has been decided

Glashub

Genesis won in 2009 right? The 200 made the biggest strides upwards. a3 is the small luxury game changer. TLX has a shot since it's a great effort to save a brand and everyone loves an underdog.

Stew4HD

I was thinking along the same lines regarding the underdog. Acura fits that position.

WheelMcCoy

I'm a bit skeptical, but it could happen. Here's MT COY's recent list:

2010 - Ford Fusion
2011 - Chevy Volt
2012 - VW Passat
2013 - Tesla Model S
2014 - Cadillac CTS

So it's not about the fastest or most powerful or luxurious car, nor is it about the one they think will sell the best. Rather, MT looks for the most distinctive car of that year. If the VW Passat can win, so can the Acura TLX.

TheAcAvenger

2015 Motor Trend Car of the Year Contenders, Finalists - Motor Trend

Finalists:
Honda Fit
Maserati Ghibli
BMW 2 series
Audi A3
Mercedes Benz C-Class
Ford Mustang
Hyundai Genesis
Kia Sedona
Lexus RC-F
VW Golf (Winner)

Not making the cut for finalists:
Chrysler 200, Kia Soul, MB B-Class, Volvo V60, Hyundai Sonata, BMW i3, Acura TLX, Alfa Romeo 4C, Subaru WRX, Subaru Legacy, Cadillac ELR, Kia K900, Mini Cooper Hardtop

AZuser

Congrats to VW.

at those who thought the TLX even had a chance.

smoooov

who cares.
For all the raving I would have thought the new C class or the mustang.

VW Golf is a POS.

justnspace

iTrader: (1)

you just made lots of fanbois mad.

ggesq

iTrader: (1)

I'm a little surprised the VW won with that list of finalists.

smoooov

VW probably just bought a nice fat advertising deal with MT.

smoooov

Colin

Yup, and they had to outbid Hyundai to win...

draph

..at least the Golf R with awd and ~300hp can still be had with a 6MT; and its rear seat room is close, if not better than, the TLX. Since it doesn't have the Audi rings on the front grill of its MQB architecture shared with Audi, the price to feature (ie value) ratio may be very close, if not better than, a TLX.

This is coming from a person who's purchased 3 new Hondas and 1 new Acura in his driving life. I chose Acura reliability and value in my 2010 TL SH-AWD 6MT in return for giving up a marginal amount of driving enjoyment from my 2007 BMW 335 (not to mention the BMW price for the same features went up $8000 in 3 years - apparently BMW pricing matches inflation rate of ivy league school tuition). Next time around, I may be willing to give up the Acura reliability for more transmission interaction in a Golf R and equal feature value. My TL will probably still have less than 100,000 miles when I get my next car when it's around 6 years old...VW resale may be a bit worse than Acura, but I bet it won't be much worse in squeaks and rattles and failures in its first 100,000 miles, and I'd pay a couple more K in total cost of ownership over 6 years so I can row my own.

It seems the Germans build cars more for driving fun, and struggle to make them double as reliable transportation appliances, while the Japanese do the opposite. It appears Acura is content to play follower to the choices being made by Infiniti and Lexus, going the route of selling luxury transportation appliances with a few ounces of sport added; and forget MTs - it's just old tech for a dying market. From a marketing perspective, that may be a smart move; but from someone who enjoys more interactivity with the car and less with its infotainment system, I think Acura may have lost me.

draph

Oh, and BTW, Acura, if you watching this forum, don't take my last comment wrong. If you actually do offer a TLX-S with SH-AWD and 6MT before the end of 2016, don't be stupid like you were with the ILX 2.4 and offer it only without the ELS. If you have to cut features to make up for the MT investment, ditch the active cruise, lane keeping, and other safety BS that non-lazy, non distracted drivers don't need. If I can pay enough attention to shift my own gears, I can pay enough attention to brake before I hit the car in front of me and keep it in my lane...Thanks.

ggesq

iTrader: (1)

So you're gonna go for the R instead of the Chrysler 200?

draph

The point I made with the 200 in my previous posts in this regard is, if I have to compromise my transmission choice, why not go a step further in the value equation and get the same ZF licensed 9AT as the TLX V6 in a car costing $10,000 less with more feature content. An MT makes all the difference in the world to me in terms of driver engagement with the car. With an AT, the TLX V6 is just another sedan to me to the point I don't think I'd be giving up much, if anything, noticeable, if I went with a loaded (ie not rental grade) 200 over a TLX Advanced V6. ...and, really, if I had to give up MT, I'd probably look more closely at the new 2015 Charger SRT 392 - it's price may not be that far away from a TLX SH-AWD Advanced and it comes with genuine rwd and a lot more rear seat room for the growing kiddies; and 485 hp with an 8-speed ZF might *almost* help me forget about what I miss in an MT with about 180 less hp and much less torque. The biggest compromise is how thirsty that 6.4 Hemi would be.

Honestly, I plan to hold out until fall 2016 to see if there will be a 2017 TLX Type S with MT, an all-new Chevy SS Sedan (while it's cool the 2015 one will be offered with MT, I'm disappointed in its fuel economy assuming its the same drive train that was in the 2009 Pontiac G8 GXP 6MT) based on Cadillac CTS architecture with LT1 V8 and 7MT from C7 'vette (if the LT1 7MT can get 29mpg in the 'vette, surely it will be able to match my 25mpg of my 2010 TL in a bigger sedan), or perhaps a Buick GNX (but in sedan form?) on the same architecture with TT V6 and MT. If none of those come to fruition, then the Golf R could be in my driveway, unless I choose to prop up the kid's college fund a bit more and go with something with MSRP in the 20s or 30s instead (GTI MT, Si MT, Accord Sport MT, or loaded 200 AT). ...and then there's always the option of driving the 2010 TL until the wheels fall off...

I'm cautiously optimistic 2017 could be a banner year for MT sedan enthusiasts. More likely, they'll all get cold feet and offer with auto only. I could see GM citing too low an MT take rate on the 2015 and 2016 SS sedan (too stupid to realize potential buyers are the type of gearheads who recognize the LS3 is now passe and LT1 in the C7 and new trucks and full size SUVs is now the GM small block of choice) that the next SS and Buick version will forego the MT offering.