Is Motorweek accurate for 0-60?
#121
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Raleigh, NC - USA
Age: 82
Posts: 7,674
Received 2,600 Likes
on
1,581 Posts
Just so you all stop beating up on the average Joe tester. At the drag strip reaction time has NOTHING to do with elapsed time. Its not unusual to see a good driver with a very quick reaction time get to the finish line before a poor driver with a slow reaction time but a better ET.
The top 3 magazines use much better testers who are willing n& able to abuse the cars for the best possible numbers out of a car but most actual owners will never match their numbers.
Drag Times listings for stock cars will generally be closer to Average Joe magazine test results than the Big Three magazine tests.
The top 3 magazines use much better testers who are willing n& able to abuse the cars for the best possible numbers out of a car but most actual owners will never match their numbers.
Drag Times listings for stock cars will generally be closer to Average Joe magazine test results than the Big Three magazine tests.
#122
#123
I have owned the following and here are there 0-60 times:
2004 6 speed TL --0-60 6.1 seconds --cost of car 30,000
2008 6 speed TL-S -- 0 -60 --5.6-5.8 --cost of car -- 37000
2011 MDX--4500 truck--0-60--7.1 seconds
2015 TLX --0-60 8.7 seconds--cost of car ---30,000 ish.
I was comparing my 2004 TL to the 2015 TLX being they are in the same price range.
And also comparing a 4500 lb TRUCK ---to the 3500 LB TSX.
I also later compared the 2012 TSX 4 cylinder automatic which goes 0-60 in 7.5 seconds because someone posted that Acura said the new 4 cylinder TLX would be 1.5 seconds quicker than the departing TSX.
So to sum up, if these 0-60 numbers are accurate, this is a horribly slow car.
Slower than a ton of econo-boxes that cost less than half the money
Slower than a lot of minivans and SUV's that outweigh it by 100's of pounds Slower than all of the models it replaced (TS,TL, TSX wagon) despite acura's BS speculation about it being 1.5 seconds faster.
#124
You'll Never Walk Alone
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Age: 37
Posts: 9,521
Received 846 Likes
on
526 Posts
It can be reasoned that the 6MT should put more power to the wheels than the DCT, because the DCT does indeed have a torque converter. On the other hand, the DCT should shift more quickly than the 5AT (although the term "lightning quick" is really a Marketing term, not a technical one), but the 5AT needs to upshift less often than the 8-speed DCT. Now, which one is more efficient in a 0-60 run... a slower shifting 5AT, or a faster DCT that requires more upshifts?
#125
Pro
0-60 times are great for magazines and for self-satisfaction I suppose in "knowing" that the car you own is faster than car X or car Y. In reality, with 99% of day-to-day circumstances by 99% of drivers, so what if the guy next to you gets to the next red light a bit before you do. No matter what you own there will always eventually be a guy next to you that has something quicker.
#126
0-60 times are great for magazines and for self-satisfaction I suppose in "knowing" that the car you own is faster than car X or car Y. In reality, with 99% of day-to-day circumstances by 99% of drivers, so what if the guy next to you gets to the next red light a bit before you do. No matter what you own there will always eventually be a guy next to you that has something quicker.
How about pulling into traffic ? Merging with traffic ? Passing ?
This isn't about comparing d*** size.
8.7 seconds is just dog ass slow. It just is, no other way to slice it.
#127
The following users liked this post:
CheeseyPoofs McNut (09-24-2014)
#129
Suzuka Master
So, you are one that pushes the pedal to the floor and holds it there for 5-7 seconds just to pull into traffic?? That is Scary!
As for passing and merging, how does 0-60 play into that? Now you are in a whole different world because you are already moving and way past 0. What is the 40-70 times?
You are worked up over something that is not even verified..
The following 2 users liked this post by Stew4HD:
dysonlu (09-25-2014),
SeismicGuy (09-25-2014)
#130
Instructor
Anyone paying attention to this thread, latest pages? https://acurazine.com/forums/automot...18032/page189/
#131
However, having driven a 4-cylinder automatic TSX with the 2.4L engine, I would still describe the current Honda 4-cylinder/auto transmission combo as quite a bad pair, requiring jerky and rough engine revving just to keep up with traffic. The 2.4L motor may have decent torque compared to earlier 4-cylinders, but there is still no comparison to turbo 4-bangers or normally-aspirated V6's.
I'd say the modern day Acura equivalent is the ILX 6MT. It compares nicely to a GS-R of yesteryear (sedans were 178 inches and the ILX is 179). At 2900 lbs and 201hp, the new car is only ~14.5 lb/hp. It probably a little quieter than a GS-R (we had three) and much quicker and more driveable.
#132
Intermediate
I was right. Their measurement is way off. Maybe they did it in Eco mode
This is with a very bad start from the shoulder with some gravel and slightly uphill. I'm pretty sure on better surface and less traffic it will be high 6s and low 7s! Enjoy
This is with a very bad start from the shoulder with some gravel and slightly uphill. I'm pretty sure on better surface and less traffic it will be high 6s and low 7s! Enjoy
The following 12 users liked this post by sstfnv:
4WDrift (09-24-2014),
a35tl (09-24-2014),
BandwidthExceeded (09-25-2014),
CheeseyPoofs McNut (09-24-2014),
Gregg (09-24-2014),
and 7 others liked this post.
#133
Moderator
#134
I'm sure Ferrari is breathing a heavy sigh of relief after reading this thread ... LaFerrari production can continue unashamedly as Acura's supercar, the TLX, is a joke.
(Apply red font color liberally if your sanity is intact)
(Apply red font color liberally if your sanity is intact)
#135
Didn't the EPA also change how fuel economy was rated since the 1990's...
The GS-R had a slightly smaller 8100rpm 1.8L engine, but it actually produced less torque than the LS 140hp variant...I spent a lot of time above 6000rpm in that car...!
I can't disagree with your analogy here... There was simply no 1990's Acura equivalent to a 4-cylinder TLX (except perhaps the Vigor 5-cylinder?).
The GS-R had a slightly smaller 8100rpm 1.8L engine, but it actually produced less torque than the LS 140hp variant...I spent a lot of time above 6000rpm in that car...!
I can't disagree with your analogy here... There was simply no 1990's Acura equivalent to a 4-cylinder TLX (except perhaps the Vigor 5-cylinder?).
My recollection is that all Integras used 1.8 in the last generation. As I recall, they were almost equal in power and torque till 6000 RPM. I loved the two changes to the engine sound/feel, one at 4400 for the VTEC crossover and the second dual at 6000 for dual intake runners.
The Vigor and later 2.5 TL only made 176hp on the old scale. IMO, the TLX is a suitable replacement to these cars in the sedan hierarchy. Vigors did have a 5MT option but 2.5 TLs did not. I couldn't say if the Vigor aimed higher, but could say the results were VERY poor.
Last edited by Colin; 09-24-2014 at 07:54 PM.
#136
Torch & Pitchfork Posse
^^^
additionally fuel content has changed and varies depending on your location and time of year.
Just in the time I have owned my RL ethanol content has increased. When I bought my RL I could find unleaded premium (91-93) with 0-10% ethanol. Now it is 15%+
Not only have I noticed a drop in MPG (which I track) but I expect a drop in performance (which I do not track in measurable means).
additionally fuel content has changed and varies depending on your location and time of year.
Just in the time I have owned my RL ethanol content has increased. When I bought my RL I could find unleaded premium (91-93) with 0-10% ethanol. Now it is 15%+
Not only have I noticed a drop in MPG (which I track) but I expect a drop in performance (which I do not track in measurable means).
#137
Um yeah. That's pretty common place for anyone trying to pull out onto a major highway. We all can't live in Texas Visit the tri state area sometime.
#138
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Raleigh, NC - USA
Age: 82
Posts: 7,674
Received 2,600 Likes
on
1,581 Posts
Local Raleigh beltline speed limit is 70 mph which means actual traffic flow is about 80 mph. A lot of the on ramps are short & coming off 35/45 mph roads. A slow merge into the traffic flow is dangerous.
40mph to 80mph can take a bit over 5 seconds in a car that can run a 0-60 in 4.6 seconds & a 13.3 @ 108mph 1/4 mile. Unfortunately many people are not even hitting the on ramps at 40mph when they have to sit for a red light before entering the ramp.
Even the best runs posted for the 4G MT would show about 6 seconds 40/80 & 8.6 0-80mph. I don't expect regardless of how the tests turn out that the TLX will be close to a 4G/MT so 8-10 seconds at WOT would not be unreasonable for a TLX to get up to merge speed.
Also agree with SilverJ based on 30 years commuting to NYC. 80mph can get you run over from behind during rush hour.
Last edited by BEAR-AvHistory; 09-24-2014 at 11:39 PM.
#139
^^ I get that but how do the 300,000 140hp Civics or 110 hp Corollas sold every year manage to merge without carnage? There is always something slower and always something faster. Just saying.
The following 2 users liked this post by Colin:
CheeseyPoofs McNut (09-25-2014),
dysonlu (09-25-2014)
#140
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Raleigh, NC - USA
Age: 82
Posts: 7,674
Received 2,600 Likes
on
1,581 Posts
No difference than passing a 50ft semi-trailer on a two lane road. More opportunities to pass & less time in the oncoming lane.
Last edited by BEAR-AvHistory; 09-24-2014 at 11:50 PM.
#142
Moderator
I was right. Their measurement is way off. Maybe they did it in Eco mode
This is with a very bad start from the shoulder with some gravel and slightly uphill. I'm pretty sure on better surface and less traffic it will be high 6s and low 7s! Enjoy
Acura TLX 2.4 DCT 0-60 - YouTube
This is with a very bad start from the shoulder with some gravel and slightly uphill. I'm pretty sure on better surface and less traffic it will be high 6s and low 7s! Enjoy
Acura TLX 2.4 DCT 0-60 - YouTube
Based upon your findings I've called the Chevy dealership and *canceled* my order for the Chevy Malibu! The poor guy was nearly sobbing - going on and on about the fact that the Chevy has exposed exhaust tips and whatnot.
#143
Senior Moderator
iTrader: (1)
#145
^
If that video is backed up by the mag tests, Acura should sue!
Just think how many people watch that show and now have the impression the 4 cyl TLX is slower than a 4 cyl accord, altima, mazda, etc. Not cool if that time is really that far off. I'm glad to see that video shows the 4 cyl runs just fine.
If that video is backed up by the mag tests, Acura should sue!
Just think how many people watch that show and now have the impression the 4 cyl TLX is slower than a 4 cyl accord, altima, mazda, etc. Not cool if that time is really that far off. I'm glad to see that video shows the 4 cyl runs just fine.
Last edited by smoooov; 09-25-2014 at 08:55 AM.
The following users liked this post:
Stew4HD (09-25-2014)
#146
Burning Brakes
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Not far enough from Chicago
Age: 46
Posts: 893
Likes: 0
Received 190 Likes
on
119 Posts
Agree the jury is out on TLX performance. But regarding your comment above.
Local Raleigh beltline speed limit is 70 mph which means actual traffic flow is about 80 mph. A lot of the on ramps are short & coming off 35/45 mph roads. A slow merge into the traffic flow is dangerous.
40mph to 80mph can take a bit over 5 seconds in a car that can run a 0-60 in 4.6 seconds & a 13.3 @ 108mph 1/4 mile. Unfortunately many people are not even hitting the on ramps at 40mph when they have to sit for a red light before entering the ramp.
Even the best runs posted for the 4G MT would show about 6 seconds 40/80 & 8.6 0-80mph. I don't expect regardless of how the tests turn out that the TLX will be close to a 4G/MT so 8-10 seconds at WOT would not be unreasonable for a TLX to get up to merge speed.
Also agree with SilverJ based on 30 years commuting to NYC. 80mph can get you run over from behind during rush hour.
Local Raleigh beltline speed limit is 70 mph which means actual traffic flow is about 80 mph. A lot of the on ramps are short & coming off 35/45 mph roads. A slow merge into the traffic flow is dangerous.
40mph to 80mph can take a bit over 5 seconds in a car that can run a 0-60 in 4.6 seconds & a 13.3 @ 108mph 1/4 mile. Unfortunately many people are not even hitting the on ramps at 40mph when they have to sit for a red light before entering the ramp.
Even the best runs posted for the 4G MT would show about 6 seconds 40/80 & 8.6 0-80mph. I don't expect regardless of how the tests turn out that the TLX will be close to a 4G/MT so 8-10 seconds at WOT would not be unreasonable for a TLX to get up to merge speed.
Also agree with SilverJ based on 30 years commuting to NYC. 80mph can get you run over from behind during rush hour.
#147
You know I have to say, when the TL or even the TSX came out I had no issues finding 0-60 numbers on it. For this 4 CYL TSX...nada. Something tells me there's a reason for that.
sstfnv run of 7.6 seconds is decent I guess, but only because its not 8.7 seconds.
Its certainly not 1.5 seconds quicker than the previous TSX as Acuras "engineeers" (which means marketing people) have claimed. As a matter of fact I'm pretty sure its .1 seconds slower than the older 4 cylinder automatic TSX.
So we still have a pretty slow car here being marketed as a pretty fast car. The Accord is still faster. As well as my 4500 lb MDX.
Its less of an embarrassment than 8.7 seconds, but still a pretty big disappointment.
sstfnv run of 7.6 seconds is decent I guess, but only because its not 8.7 seconds.
Its certainly not 1.5 seconds quicker than the previous TSX as Acuras "engineeers" (which means marketing people) have claimed. As a matter of fact I'm pretty sure its .1 seconds slower than the older 4 cylinder automatic TSX.
So we still have a pretty slow car here being marketed as a pretty fast car. The Accord is still faster. As well as my 4500 lb MDX.
Its less of an embarrassment than 8.7 seconds, but still a pretty big disappointment.
#148
Intermediate
You know I have to say, when the TL or even the TSX came out I had no issues finding 0-60 numbers on it. For this 4 CYL TSX...nada. Something tells me there's a reason for that.
sstfnv run of 7.6 seconds is decent I guess, but only because its not 8.7 seconds.
Its certainly not 1.5 seconds quicker than the previous TSX as Acuras "engineeers" (which means marketing people) have claimed. As a matter of fact I'm pretty sure its .1 seconds slower than the older 4 cylinder automatic TSX.
So we still have a pretty slow car here being marketed as a pretty fast car. The Accord is still faster. As well as my 4500 lb MDX.
Its less of an embarrassment than 8.7 seconds, but still a pretty big disappointment.
sstfnv run of 7.6 seconds is decent I guess, but only because its not 8.7 seconds.
Its certainly not 1.5 seconds quicker than the previous TSX as Acuras "engineeers" (which means marketing people) have claimed. As a matter of fact I'm pretty sure its .1 seconds slower than the older 4 cylinder automatic TSX.
So we still have a pretty slow car here being marketed as a pretty fast car. The Accord is still faster. As well as my 4500 lb MDX.
Its less of an embarrassment than 8.7 seconds, but still a pretty big disappointment.
If I test the TSX in the same conditions as in my video I'm pretty sure that it will be 8+ sec. So I can't agree with your statement that the TLX is slower than TSX. I'm saying that as a former owner of a 2012 TSX.
But either way don't expect GT-R like 0-60 times from the 2.4L TLX. I personally think the acceleration is adequate and considering that on long drives it gets 40-42mpg I'm very happy with the car.
The following users liked this post:
Stew4HD (09-25-2014)
#149
You're merging down from an overpass with concrete barriers obscuring your view -- into the left freaking lane! With this, you can't get up to merging speed in advance, because if you don't have a sufficient gap, you need to stop suddenly or you end up in the left lane.
Some people, often the elderly but also those in slower cars, simply stop at the bottom of the on-ramp, even in light-to-moderate traffic. I've seen people sit there for minutes, sometimes creating a backup of several cars.
Sometimes the traffic is so bad that you have no choice but to stop, and then you need a huge gap because you're starting from zero, and you often need to depend on the sanity and attentiveness of those in the left lane, and those in the right lane who might decide to switch over. That's how all the folks in the slow cars survive, but it isn't pretty. I'm amazed we haven't had more accidents out there, but I think it's because the locals know the patterns and compensate. It's often people with out-of-state plates who have the close calls.
I try to make sure the bottom of the on-ramp is clear, then hold second gear all the way down. If there's a sufficient gap, I nail the throttle at the bottom to merge. It usually works, but sometimes I have to stop, at which point I wish I had more than 201hp and 172tq. A couple of times, my TSX bogged down under heavy throttle from a stop, because the nannies kicked in to stop wheelspin. This was scary and frustrating, so I simply learned to turn of ESC for these merges. It was a little less stressful in my old Saab 9-5 Aero!
I actually think it might be less stressful in the TLX I4; just flip it into Sport+ and nail it.
The following users liked this post:
BEAR-AvHistory (09-25-2014)
#150
If I test the TSX in the same conditions as in my video I'm pretty sure that it will be 8+ sec. So I can't agree with your statement that the TLX is slower than TSX. I'm saying that as a former owner of a 2012 TSX.
But either way don't expect GT-R like 0-60 times from the 2.4L TLX. I personally think the acceleration is adequate and considering that on long drives it gets 40-42mpg I'm very happy with the car.
But either way don't expect GT-R like 0-60 times from the 2.4L TLX. I personally think the acceleration is adequate and considering that on long drives it gets 40-42mpg I'm very happy with the car.
I recently had a 2014 MDX as a loaner car (while my 2011 MDX was getting serviced) and the 2014 MDX goes 0-60 in 6.1 seconds (vs my 2011 MDX which does 0-60 in 7.1)
I could REALLY feel the difference and honestly floored it every chance I could get because it was just FUN.
I've had my 2008 TL-S for a while now and would gladly buy a 4cyl TLX if it were in the ballpark acceleration wise but going from the 3G TL to a car that's over 2 seconds slower would be a drag for me personally.
I'm just dissapointed more than anything, to me, the flagship Sedan of Acura (the four cylinder version TLX) should not be outclassed acceleration wise by a wide margin by a 4 cyl accord.
#151
Moderator
You're right, but power definitely helps, and in some cases it's a real safety issue. In Philly, we have a couple of insanely dangerous merges onto I-76 in Center City, and in heavy, fast traffic I'm amazed people in the slower cars survive.
You're merging down from an overpass with concrete barriers obscuring your view -- into the left freaking lane! With this, you can't get up to merging speed in advance, because if you don't have a sufficient gap, you need to stop suddenly or you end up in the left lane.
Some people, often the elderly but also those in slower cars, simply stop at the bottom of the on-ramp, even in light-to-moderate traffic. I've seen people sit there for minutes, sometimes creating a backup of several cars.
Sometimes the traffic is so bad that you have no choice but to stop, and then you need a huge gap because you're starting from zero, and you often need to depend on the sanity and attentiveness of those in the left lane, and those in the right lane who might decide to switch over. That's how all the folks in the slow cars survive, but it isn't pretty. I'm amazed we haven't had more accidents out there, but I think it's because the locals know the patterns and compensate. It's often people with out-of-state plates who have the close calls.
I try to make sure the bottom of the on-ramp is clear, then hold second gear all the way down. If there's a sufficient gap, I nail the throttle at the bottom to merge. It usually works, but sometimes I have to stop, at which point I wish I had more than 201hp and 172tq. A couple of times, my TSX bogged down under heavy throttle from a stop, because the nannies kicked in to stop wheelspin. This was scary and frustrating, so I simply learned to turn of ESC for these merges. It was a little less stressful in my old Saab 9-5 Aero!
I actually think it might be less stressful in the TLX I4; just flip it into Sport+ and nail it.
You're merging down from an overpass with concrete barriers obscuring your view -- into the left freaking lane! With this, you can't get up to merging speed in advance, because if you don't have a sufficient gap, you need to stop suddenly or you end up in the left lane.
Some people, often the elderly but also those in slower cars, simply stop at the bottom of the on-ramp, even in light-to-moderate traffic. I've seen people sit there for minutes, sometimes creating a backup of several cars.
Sometimes the traffic is so bad that you have no choice but to stop, and then you need a huge gap because you're starting from zero, and you often need to depend on the sanity and attentiveness of those in the left lane, and those in the right lane who might decide to switch over. That's how all the folks in the slow cars survive, but it isn't pretty. I'm amazed we haven't had more accidents out there, but I think it's because the locals know the patterns and compensate. It's often people with out-of-state plates who have the close calls.
I try to make sure the bottom of the on-ramp is clear, then hold second gear all the way down. If there's a sufficient gap, I nail the throttle at the bottom to merge. It usually works, but sometimes I have to stop, at which point I wish I had more than 201hp and 172tq. A couple of times, my TSX bogged down under heavy throttle from a stop, because the nannies kicked in to stop wheelspin. This was scary and frustrating, so I simply learned to turn of ESC for these merges. It was a little less stressful in my old Saab 9-5 Aero!
I actually think it might be less stressful in the TLX I4; just flip it into Sport+ and nail it.
#152
Yeah I hear you man. I was hoping for some mid-6 times for the 4 cylinder (which I would have been cool with) and perhaps mid 5's for the 6 cylinder.
I recently had a 2014 MDX as a loaner car (while my 2011 MDX was getting serviced) and the 2014 MDX goes 0-60 in 6.1 seconds (vs my 2011 MDX which does 0-60 in 7.1)
I could REALLY feel the difference and honestly floored it every chance I could get because it was just FUN.
I've had my 2008 TL-S for a while now and would gladly buy a 4cyl TLX if it were in the ballpark acceleration wise but going from the 3G TL to a car that's over 2 seconds slower would be a drag for me personally.
I'm just dissapointed more than anything, to me, the flagship Sedan of Acura (the four cylinder version TLX) should not be outclassed acceleration wise by a wide margin by a 4 cyl accord.
I recently had a 2014 MDX as a loaner car (while my 2011 MDX was getting serviced) and the 2014 MDX goes 0-60 in 6.1 seconds (vs my 2011 MDX which does 0-60 in 7.1)
I could REALLY feel the difference and honestly floored it every chance I could get because it was just FUN.
I've had my 2008 TL-S for a while now and would gladly buy a 4cyl TLX if it were in the ballpark acceleration wise but going from the 3G TL to a car that's over 2 seconds slower would be a drag for me personally.
I'm just dissapointed more than anything, to me, the flagship Sedan of Acura (the four cylinder version TLX) should not be outclassed acceleration wise by a wide margin by a 4 cyl accord.
#153
Suzuka Master
Well since you are obviously relying on the quickest magazine test numbers you can find ( which I would like to see the evidence of) vs. an owner video to compare the cars I suggest you wait for the mags to produce stats for the TLX before you get too disappointed. Either that or do your own video of your mdx doing a 7.1 0-60.
#154
Senior Moderator
iTrader: (1)
Silver- have you driven the 4cyl? What does your butt dyno tell you? Faster/slower or same as your S?
#156
Since you are one of the prime defenders here racking up the post count I don't really see any sense in your question. If you think everyone is passive on the subject that has over 1000 hits a day on a very very small member base TLX specific forum enjoy your TLX over all thoughts.
BTW Stew4HD says he "keeps coming back to watch the arguments and, of course, add to them from time to time". Are you on the same page as him?
BTW Stew4HD says he "keeps coming back to watch the arguments and, of course, add to them from time to time". Are you on the same page as him?
Who is thinking "everyone is passive on the subject"? Did you just produce yet another hyperbole there?
#157
I also have exiting excitement. Coming east on I-76, I split off left onto I-676, then need to exit immediately to the right to get into my neighborhood. The catch? The right lane for my exit is also the on-ramp for I-76 west onto I-676, replete with concrete barriers to reduce visibility. This can get hairy, and a few times I've had to abort and go to the next exit. Sometimes it's fun though, when I have just enough room to safely nail the throttle and whip through traffic across the lane into the exit. Once again, power helps, but in this case the TSX's excellent handling balance comes to the fore. And once again, the TLX would be better with the extra transitional stability from P-AWS.
#158
#159
0-60 times are great for magazines and for self-satisfaction I suppose in "knowing" that the car you own is faster than car X or car Y. In reality, with 99% of day-to-day circumstances by 99% of drivers, so what if the guy next to you gets to the next red light a bit before you do. No matter what you own there will always eventually be a guy next to you that has something quicker.
The following users liked this post:
Stew4HD (09-25-2014)
#160
Senior Moderator
iTrader: (1)