paperboy42190

iTrader: (7)

Is it really right to place the TLX under the TL subforum as a 5th gen TL? Isn't the TLX as much of a TSX replacement as it is the TL replacement?
Price wise it starts at approx the same price as a brand new TSX for the 4 cylinder model(~$30k), and approx the same price as a brand new TL for the 6 cylinder model.
As much as I would love to say the TLX is an "evolution" of the TL, I don't know if I can lie to myself.
I personally feel the TLX shouldn't be under either the TSX nor the TL subforum, but be under a new subforum by itself.

Is there something I'm missing? I'm open to debates for and against this issue.

ggesq

iTrader: (1)

The TLX was announced as the next TL. It has the same wheelbase as the 4G, just shorter- yet similar if not same interior dimensions. The TSX was completely axed and put out to pasture. IMHO, the ILX replaced the TSX.

Edward'TLS

The RLX is the 3G RL.

Likewise, the TLX is the 5G TL.

Colin

It replaces both, it can't go in both sections, can't make everyone happy.

a35tl

The way I view it is that the TLX is a replacement for the TL. I think they simply discontinued the TSX because it was so close to the TL. The introduction of the ILX takes the entry car position that the TSX once occupied.

rockyfeller

iTrader: (6)

While it can be considered a replacement for 2 lines and it isn't a fresh from scratch new line (like a ZDX), it's more importantly considered a new model line for Acura. Thank God this isn't the 7th Gen Vigor, lol, can you imagine that? (My car would probably be the 5GVigor) This is in fact the 1st gen TLX, not a 5GTL, 3GTSX and not a 7GVigor.

So what are you going to call the 2TLX when it comes out one day? The 6GTL?? Haha. TLs will be old news by then just like Vigors, TSX and 3.2TLs. Face it, the TL is dead as far as Acura sees it. This is the 1st gen TLX.

MuGen7Modulo

^Good point right there. I said this before, RLX and TLX need separate sections.

rockyfeller

iTrader: (6)

I see it more like the Civic Si was eating RSX sales. That left a void and the TSX was too big to really be entry level and was cannibalizing 4GTL sales. They decided the entry level should be somewhere in the middle of the RSX and TSX which wouldn't overlap anything, so that equals an ILX. TLX split into 2 models to cover the large expanse between the ILX and the RLX. So on paper the restructuring with the new models ensures no overlap and gives a clear identity for all 3 model lines.

What they didn't bank on is that people would quickly figure out that their ILX is a gussied up Civic and the RLX is bland. Now with the TLX expected to be the volume leader, if this plan doesn't work, these people need to learn how to inject some serious character, soul and personality in their cars to save the brand.

It's not enough to think something looks logical on paper. The restructuring shows they are serious to let go of the old identity and start fresh. That's nice. But you should be bold. They have made 3 very forgettable car lines now. Some pragmatic people will buy them as commuter appliances. To make droves of people buy them like the Legend or the 3GTL, people need to FEEL like buying these cars.

holografique

I suggested once before to simply update the titles to "TL/TLX" and "RL/RLX"

that is the cleanest and most concise way to address the model name change withing the generations.

skabei

The ILX does not replace the TSX. It's a replacement for the CSX/EL line that was only available in Canada. It's a new introduction for the US market though. Speaking of which, I've had an EL and a CSX in my family and they were pleasant, but the ILX that I had as a rental was not impressive =S

neuronbob

I have brought the issue up to the administrators and other moderators again. Will let you know what they say. I think the best solution is Holografique's and I've suggested it in the past. The lack of visibility for RLX and TLX at the top of the forum will not make sense for new users. For us old users, it clearly makes sense....but again we have to think of new users.

Thank you for your interest in our forum!

rockyfeller

iTrader: (6)

Hmm yea I just noticed the arrangement of the tabs on top. The CL could be considered a 2 door TL, but it's a good thing it has been given it's own section. The ILX gets it's own tab but not the TLX or RLX? I understand they probably don't want to crowd the toolbar up but there is space up there for a couple more. I'm sure these cars will sell at least more than the CL.

I have been on this forum for this long and haven't really explored it all I guess. I'm just noticing this now; where are the Integra and Vigor sections? lol. I guess they are such old cars and AZine came about after it's production. But there are at least 1GTL/RL forums. I still see tons more Integras out there, so the owners are out there, I know there are other forums they use. I wonder why AZine didn't want to cultivate the interest here? I would imagine the discussion would be at least half as lively as the 3GTL forum is. It seems like RSX discussion pretty limited too maybe that's why?

rockyfeller

iTrader: (6)

Good point, most of us here in the US don't even consider the CSX though it's true the ILX is on that platform.

Why is it that the people in charge with coming up with these rebadging strategies at most of these companies are idiots? Very few companies get it right. I say keep it simple; like Audi, or Lexus. There is no confusion there. Everyone else has made a mess out of their lineups with BMW, MB and Infiniti the worst examples.

It's funny how in the early 90s Acura started off with names (which I've always preferred over letters/numbers anyways. Legend, Integra, Vigor etc. These make a more sentimental association.) They should have kept it this way instead of following the Germans like Lexus/Infiniti. It would have kept them more distinct. But noooo they had to copycat.

Even keeping it alphanumeric, they could have done it all better. IMO what Acura should have done is denote any coupe with an "S" at the end of it. The RSX should have been an RS and the CL should have been a TS. And anything that is AWD should have an "X" at the end of it. (like the MDX/RDX) So the base TL should stay TL and the SH-AWD should be a TLX. This also allows additional model line spinoffs to be added in the future without requiring a full model line rebadging. I don't think this requires a doctorate degree to understand.

Dump the "Super-Handling" moniker. What is that? lol. I guess they didn't want people to think it's just for snow and it is designed for on-road performance. I guess they also needed something fancy to say that sounded like Quattro/4matic/X-Drive. But I think just making it part of the model designation keeps it cleaner and simple.

We'd also have far few tabs on our forum keeping it simplier for us. Why didn't Acura consider AZine? They should hire me.

motegi

I agree the TLX is a bridge car to fill in the space between the TL and TSX. You can see this in terms of engines, price, and dimensions.

Although the actual numbers haven't been released I'll bet the EPA total interior volume (passenger + cargo) will sit in between the lower midsize TL and the upper compact TSX.

The TSX level base price of the 4 cylinder TLX means that Acura wants this car to reach lower down the chain than the outgoing TL did. For an upper midsize sedan Acura now wants to make the RLX the clear choice in their showrooms.

So I agree that the TLX deserves a separate section on the forum.


Rockyfeller:

I totally agree with the badging confusion and your suggestions make sense.

nttstt444

iTrader: (1)

To be honest I was suprised to see it listed as the 5G TLX in the drop down menu here. I personaly view it as the 1G TLX. I think it should be in its own section as its a brand new model.

motegi

Looks like I stand corrected. The TLX appears to be SMALLER inside than both the TL and the TSX...

Even more reason to put it on a separate heading.

quantum7

i agree.....I see the TLX as a new car and not a revised edition of either the TL or the TSX. I think that it should have a separate heading. New body, new trans, lots of new.

neuronbob

I did bring the issue to the admins on the same day as my last message. They have replied to me and are considering. It would be nice to see a top level page as tlx.acurazine.com as there is for the other models. I'll keep you all posted as deliberations progress.

Colin

It seems like getting this addition is as hard as getting exhaust tips on an Acura...

quantum7

^nice!

motegi

Now that we have the true dimensions for the TLX I think it is important to separate it from the TL section.

We know it is in a different vehicle size category now, having moved into the EPA Compact segment.

It is closer in interior volume to the TSX. I think that continuing to leave it in the TL section is somewhat misleading as the TL was a midsize sedan.

draph

IMHO, the groupings should be based on architecture.
- TSX was based on Euro Accord architecture (actually was a rebadged Euro Accord). It stands alone.
-TL/TLX based on US Accord - they should remain grouped together.
- ILX based on Civic
- RL/RLX - ??? not sure - both transverse engine, stretched Accord platform? Japanese market architecture? Double-wishbone suspension?
- Vigor/Legend were two versions of same architecture (Legend stretched version), if I remember correctly. They had longitudinal mounted engines and were not based on any North American market architectures like today's TL/TLX and ILX. If the first TL was on Vigor architecture, then the lines get blurred a bit, however. From a forum perspective, if 1G TL is close to Vigor, IMHO, it would make more sense to group it with Vigor.

Rocketsfan

I don't think the forum naming needs to be all that technical. Honda themselves stated that the TSX was discontinued and the TLX replaced the TL. We can talk about interior volume, engine size, etc. to try and qualify these cars, but it's apparent Honda/Acura thinks this is the TL's replacement - if it's smaller, so be it. If it's larger, so be it.

motegi

Excellent post. Your explanation definitely makes good sense.

However my point was that the 2015 TLX has more major differences from the 2014 TL than things in common.

The name is different
The base price is $5000 lower ($31,890 vs $36,925)
The base engine has 2 less cylinders (4 vs 6)
The EPA size category is 1 class smaller (Compact vs Midsize)

I think keeping it within the TL section is doing this "all-new" car a disservice.

In the end it is just a difference of opinion. Many manufacturers share platforms across multiple models and sub-brands. Just because they have a shared platform does not mean that they should be lumped together as being the same car.