When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
They don't like the push button gear selector.
They don't like the 9 speed trans
They don't like the start/stop feature
They claim the Ford Fusion is a better riding car, better driving car and a quieter car.
"It's an okay car"
I'd say they're not a fan
These guys are a joke! They compare the TLX gear shifter to playing with blocks when they were kids and then they go onto say that they are unable to operate the shifter properly. How did these jokers ever get out of kindergarten?
Fun to drive + automatic transmission + rides like a boat handling don't usually go together.
Are you talking about the TLX?!? 99/100 reviews talk about "sure footed" and "confident" feeling of the handling or "striking just the right balance between sporty and comfort" - yes, it's not Porsche level stiffness, but neither is it remotely close to the floaty boat-like feeling of driving a Buick Century. I feel even less roll in the hard turns, in this car (2018 TLX Tech V6), than I did in my VW Golf GTi (that car had awesome breaks, and good fun handling, but felt a little "top heavy" to me).
Originally Posted by ostrich
The TLX Jewel Eye headlights do not provide much in terms of forward visibility!? Oh my goodness, did they drive the same car that I actually own!? Unbelievable...
I'm new to TLX ownership, which is why I'm responding to this moderately old post... But yes, the first time I drove mine at night it brought a smile to my face seeing just how much better the headlights are than previous cars (non-LED) headlights that I'd owned. If CR couldn't see well, then I feel like it must have been because their cabin was filled with too much crack smoke?
Are you talking about the TLX?!? 99/100 reviews talk about "sure footed" and "confident" feeling of the handling or "striking just the right balance between sporty and comfort" - yes, it's not Porsche level stiffness, but neither is it remotely close to the floaty boat-like feeling of driving a Buick Century. I feel even less roll in the hard turns, in this car (2018 TLX Tech V6), than I did in my VW Golf GTi (that car had awesome breaks, and good fun handling, but felt a little "top heavy" to me).
I'm new to TLX ownership, which is why I'm responding to this moderately old post... But yes, the first time I drove mine at night it brought a smile to my face seeing just how much better the headlights are than previous cars (non-LED) headlights that I'd owned. If CR couldn't see well, then I feel like it must have been because their cabin was filled with too much crack smoke?
I would avoid replying to a 3 year old thread because many of these people have already moved on from TLX ownership after the horrible transmission debacle.
Agree with Kurtatx on old threads. Some of the TLX's most ardent supporters in this thread have bailed out. Question I have is about frame of reference. What car did you have before the TLX?
Agree with Kurtatx on old threads. Some of the TLX's most ardent supporters in this thread have bailed out. Question I have is about frame of reference. What car did you have before the TLX?
I've given a list in other threads where I think you participated, but, no harm repeating in a thread this old....
Going back to around ~2001 I moved to Manhattan in 1999 and after about a year or two in NYC decided I didn't really need a car there so I sold my VW Golf GTi. Then I moved to the midwest in 2003 and needed a car again. Serendipity resulted in me getting the very practical but boring 2.0L 4 Door Toyota Camry given to me as an inheritance and then, a few years later, as my wife wanted a smaller car to drive we bought her a new 2008 Scion xD since it felt more powerful and sturdier than the Honda Fit.
A few more years later, now I've got two kids and fondly recall early childhood memories of road trips in my parents 1969 VW van that had a mattress in the back, we buy a 2014 Toyota Sienna (heavy discounts from Toyota and 0% financing make the decision easy).
The other car of note would be the 1981 Formula Firebird that I had purchased for $150 because the engine had caught fire and filled nearly completely with a black coal-like substance. I had foolish young dreams of cleaning out the soot and rebuilding the engine all shiney and new with just some hand tools, a toothbrush, and a jar of gasoline as a solvent - started with the Quadjet carburetor and was much relieved when a co-worker offered me the engine out of his old Firebird because his wife was getting sick of seeing it just rusting in their yard. I bought a Chilten's manual and about $20 worth of tools, borrowed a neighbor's engine hoist and changed the engine and transmission myself.
I've driven friends BMWs and often read about many various different cars over the years, but, never fulfilled my desire to own a real sports car - my wife recently changed jobs and was given a car plan which required either Honda or Acura. I don't know if I made the best choice, but I am happy with the TLX and 90+% of the time it's role is as the daily driver for the main errand runner and caretaker of our two kids (me).
My son and I both wanted the Civic Type R, but, going with the TLX was a compromise that might have more pluses than minuses for our daily use?
Last edited by Christopher.; 12-22-2017 at 01:31 PM.
If your wife gets a benefit that makes the Acura even less expensive, it seems like an obvious choice.
Right - $500 / month discount is "an offer I can't refuse" (particularly when it's for a car that I found appealing). The only decision I needed to make was between Honda and Acura, and which model. I would have gotten a Civic Type R, but to put it bluntly, the reason I didn't was that the Honda dealers were douchebags. Honda Accord Sport 2.0T or Touring 2.0T became my second choice because the only places that had the Type R in stock were up-charging by $10K. The bad taste left in my mouth by Honda make me a sucker for the Acura salesman though, I was probably one of the easiest sales he'd had in weeks :P
Unlike some guys, I actually LIKED my Toyota Sienna (which I traded in to get the TLX). Sure it didn't handle like a Miyata (LOL) but, it's actually not unpleasant to drive and was so practical, so much room, like a little home on wheels almost... (I didn't install cabinets and a bed, no, but I could have)
The Acura TLX scratches some "different itches" than the mini van did, for sure.
Originally Posted by svtmike
My company gets discounts on GM. I don't bother because I can't stand to be in a GM interior any longer than I have to be.
You don't like the Cadillac CTS 3.6L Twin Turbo? I have not ridden in one, but I would have thought they'd have figured out how to catch up with the German interiors by now???
Last edited by Christopher.; 12-22-2017 at 03:13 PM.
Thanks Christopher. Good List. One of the problems with the internet is people talking at cross purposes simply because their frame of reference is totally different. My reference is jaded because I always had at least one car that could flatten your eyeballs at the time. They also tend to go faster the further they recede into the past.
Drove a lot of muscle cars back in the day but unless they were "prepared" a well driven TLX should give them an interesting race. Still guys today are paying six figures for cars I bought new for $3K to relive the dream or get the ride they could not get in their youth. Personally am a big fan of resto-mods. If I had any of my old cars they would get modern suspensions, brakes, engines, transmissions & tires.
I just read that the Cadillac 3.6 Turbo has the same 5.7 second 0 - 60 time as my FWD TLX does - that's somehow a little comforting
I suppose I find tires typically lasting me for about 25,000 miles even though they're rated for at least 50 - 60K - I wonder how much more tires for the A-Spec cost over the base model?
Last edited by Christopher.; 12-22-2017 at 04:14 PM.
You don't like the Cadillac CTS 3.6L Twin Turbo? I have not ridden in one, but I would have thought they'd have figured out how to catch up with the German interiors by now???
Nope. Too big, too much of a gas hog, touch screen interface. Ugh.
I look at the ATS as more of the A4 competitor, with the CTS lining up with the A6. Although Cadillac is taking a much better direction than they have in the past, I am still simply not interested in owning one.
I just read that the Cadillac 3.6 Turbo has the same 5.7 second 0 - 60 time as my FWD TLX does - that's somehow a little comforting
I suppose I find tires typically lasting me for about 25,000 miles even though they're rated for at least 50 - 60K - I wonder how much more tires for the A-Spec cost over the base model?
Go reread the article. 0-60 in 5.7 must be the time for the naturally aspirated 3.6 (335 hp) the turbo should be at least 1 sec faster to 60mph.
Oops - well, at least here is some good news to help me not regret choosing the TLX over the lower cost (perhaps higher value) 2018 2.0T Accord options (as we know the TLX J35 V6 has even more power than the one in the Accord V6): http://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars...st-the-old-v6/
Originally Posted by SergeyM
Go reread the article. 0-60 in 5.7 must be the time for the naturally aspirated 3.6 (335 hp) the turbo should be at least 1 sec faster to 60mph.
Oops - well, at least here is some good news to help me not regret choosing the TLX over the lower cost (perhaps higher value) 2018 2.0T Accord options (as we know the TLX J35 V6 has even more power than the one in the Accord V6): Dyno Testing the Honda Accord's New Turbo Motor Against the Old V6
Not going to comment on his WHP to CHP conversion factor as I don't know anything about that dyno system. Only have experience with DynoJet & Mustang. That said going back to our ILX stuff though this statement at the very beginning of the piece is worth posting:
"If you want a six-cylinder 2018 Accord, you have to go to your Acura dealer and buy a TLX, which is kind of just a fancy Accord and is not available with a stick shift."
This image hangs around the TLX's neck in the industry like an Albatross.
Last edited by BEAR-AvHistory; 12-23-2017 at 12:31 PM.
So, this car here in this picture, does it look like it could be an Accord? Yes it does - I mean, Honda could have made an Accord that looks exactly like this on the outside, except with an H badge instead of an A badge. But they didn't. And I think, for the 2018 model year, putting "brother vs brother" the Acura side of the family wins hands down in the TLX vs Accord aesthetics competition. Visually there is enough distinction that people look at my car and they say "that is a beautiful car". I look at the 2018 Accord and I don't say "beautiful" I say: "huh, I could live with that, it's kind of neat looking and a little weird looking, but overall just "OK" and I don't mind it." The way the Accord looks (at least this year's model) is not a selling point for me, and it's not going to drive me away from it either. If I buy an Accord, it's gonna be because I know I'm getting a great car for the money and I'm gonna be happy driving it, if I imagine that my alternative was a Toyota Camry (which I owned before).
Last edited by Christopher.; 12-23-2017 at 02:49 PM.
So, this car here in this picture, does it look like it could be an Accord? Yes it does - I mean, Honda could have made an Accord that looks exactly like this on the outside, except with an H badge instead of an A badge. But they didn't. And I think, for the 2018 model year, putting "brother vs brother" the Acura side of the family wins hands down in the TLX vs Accord aesthetics competition. Visually there is enough distinction that people look at my car and they say "that is a beautiful car". I look at the 2018 Accord and I don't say "beautiful" I say: "huh, I could live with that, it's kind of neat looking and a little weird looking, but overall just "OK" and I don't mind it." The way the Accord looks (at least this year's model) is not a selling point for me, and it's not going to drive me away from it either. If I buy an Accord, it's gonna be because I know I'm getting a great car for the money and I'm gonna be happy driving it, if I imagine that my alternative was a Toyota Camry (which I owned before).
Just so we all know... the 2018 Accord puts down 300lbft at the wheels. Who gives a fuck what it is rated at, that's at least 330lbft at the crank. In an Accord. A fucking conservative as shit, Honda Accord. That TLX deserves to be where it is on that list. It's out dated. It's old. It has a nice new face but its heart is old.
Just so we all know... the 2018 Accord puts down 300lbft at the wheels. Who gives a fuck what it is rated at, that's at least 330lbft at the crank. In an Accord. A fucking conservative as shit, Honda Accord. That TLX deserves to be where it is on that list. It's out dated. It's old. It has a nice new face but its heart is old.
Kind of stating the obvious. The mid cycle refresh was just that. I wouldn't expect any drivetrain changes until the all new model appears.
Kind of stating the obvious. The mid cycle refresh was just that. I wouldn't expect any drivetrain changes until the all new model appears.
If the TLX is considered old now, in two years will be museum material. Acura has to learn to inject stuff in between MMC. If they fuck up consumer wants in between FMC, it's difficult to recover. Dealerships don't have many models to sale if it happens.
If the TLX is considered old now, in two years will be museum material. Acura has to learn to inject stuff in between MMC. If they fuck up consumer wants in between FMC, it's difficult to recover. Dealerships don't have many models to sale if it happens.
I was referring to his comments relating to the engine/heart being old. No manufacturer will go with new drivetrains for a ground up redesign just to ditch them 2-3 yrs later during a MMC.
So, this car here in this picture, does it look like it could be an Accord? Yes it does - I mean, Honda could have made an Accord that looks exactly like this on the outside, except with an H badge instead of an A badge. But they didn't. And I think, for the 2018 model year, putting "brother vs brother" the Acura side of the family wins hands down in the TLX vs Accord aesthetics competition. Visually there is enough distinction that people look at my car and they say "that is a beautiful car". I look at the 2018 Accord and I don't say "beautiful" I say: "huh, I could live with that, it's kind of neat looking and a little weird looking, but overall just "OK" and I don't mind it." The way the Accord looks (at least this year's model) is not a selling point for me, and it's not going to drive me away from it either. If I buy an Accord, it's gonna be because I know I'm getting a great car for the money and I'm gonna be happy driving it, if I imagine that my alternative was a Toyota Camry (which I owned before).
I was referring to his comments relating to the engine/heart being old. No manufacturer will go with new drivetrains for a ground up redesign just to ditch them 2-3 yrs later during a MMC.
You're on drugs. Did the 3G TL not come with a new engine for the Type S for the last two years of it's model life? Yeah. Good argument. No manufacturer will go with new drivetrains? Heh. Right.
All they did was slap red leather and tail pipes on the car, and 2/3s of AZ went bananas for the same exact car, because the suspension was stiffened up 1.5% over previous. What this tells me is the original TLX, released in what, 2014, was already way behind the times in many categories. All Acura did was catch up to 2014, when they released the MMC. Guess what- it still sucks (given it's price point). Don't take my opinion on it. Take everyone who isn't buying one as the true opinion regarding the car.
There is *NO* reason the Accord is more advanced than the TLX, even though it comes out sooner. The Accord should always be playing second fiddle, compared to the TLX. Back in the day, Acura was *ALWAYS* ahead of Honda. Hell, the Integra vs Civic... the Integra always had more power and a bigger engine. *ALWAYS*.
Now you can buy an Accord that is larger, lighter, super sexy on the inside (have you sat in one? I was floored I was sitting in an Accord), with more power, better transmissions (at least as far as we know, so far), and more tech. This is absolutely wrong. The TLX needs to hit that mark first, before the Accord. You may not agree and that's fine- once again, I'll point you towards the sales numbers which indicate there are problems, and there have been problems since the TLX was launched. Since day 1, Acura has been unable to meet what the TSX and TL sold as together.
Acura is putting its own nails in its coffin. They keep doing ass backwards stuff, or are so incredibly stubborn they refuse to listen to what we, the people who are looking to spend our hard earned money, actually want. No one asked for a ground up redesign. Well, actually, that's not true at all. MANY people have been asking for a ground up redesign, for years now. Remember when Honda released the 2013 Civic and it was considered the biggest failure for a Civic, ever since they started producing them in 1978? Honda didn't even bat an eye at fixing that car up, asap. They literally changed it after 1 year on the market. Shows how much Honda actually cares about Acura (or how much acura actually cares to save themselves).
You're on drugs. Did the 3G TL not come with a new engine for the Type S for the last two years of it's model life? Yeah. Good argument. No manufacturer will go with new drivetrains? Heh. Right.
All they did was slap red leather and tail pipes on the car, and 2/3s of AZ went bananas for the same exact car, because the suspension was stiffened up 1.5% over previous. What this tells me is the original TLX, released in what, 2014, was already way behind the times in many categories. All Acura did was catch up to 2014, when they released the MMC. Guess what- it still sucks (given it's price point). Don't take my opinion on it. Take everyone who isn't buying one as the true opinion regarding the car.
There is *NO* reason the Accord is more advanced than the TLX, even though it comes out sooner. The Accord should always be playing second fiddle, compared to the TLX. Back in the day, Acura was *ALWAYS* ahead of Honda. Hell, the Integra vs Civic... the Integra always had more power and a bigger engine. *ALWAYS*.
Now you can buy an Accord that is larger, lighter, super sexy on the inside (have you sat in one? I was floored I was sitting in an Accord), with more power, better transmissions (at least as far as we know, so far), and more tech. This is absolutely wrong. The TLX needs to hit that mark first, before the Accord. You may not agree and that's fine- once again, I'll point you towards the sales numbers which indicate there are problems, and there have been problems since the TLX was launched. Since day 1, Acura has been unable to meet what the TSX and TL sold as together.
Acura is putting its own nails in its coffin. They keep doing ass backwards stuff, or are so incredibly stubborn they refuse to listen to what we, the people who are looking to spend our hard earned money, actually want. No one asked for a ground up redesign. Well, actually, that's not true at all. MANY people have been asking for a ground up redesign, for years now. Remember when Honda released the 2013 Civic and it was considered the biggest failure for a Civic, ever since they started producing them in 1978? Honda didn't even bat an eye at fixing that car up, asap. They literally changed it after 1 year on the market. Shows how much Honda actually cares about Acura (or how much acura actually cares to save themselves).
I think I just realized why there’s been so much anxiety around here. You and your cohort actually think Acura cares what you think. I mean, am I reading this incorrectly? You don’t like the direction the brand has been going. You choose to buy something else. What is there to be gained by bitching and crying here all day long?
Depends on how long the production cycle is & how much the company is putting into R&D. My car got a new engine design in its 4th year of production during its mid cycle update. Have three engine upgrades since 2011.
Last edited by BEAR-AvHistory; 12-24-2017 at 12:42 PM.
I was referring to his comments relating to the engine/heart being old. No manufacturer will go with new drivetrains for a ground up redesign just to ditch them 2-3 yrs later during a MMC.
Not saying tech to ditch, saying tech to keep for the greater good. Unlike the Acura developed 8dct which can't really be used anymore due to poor specs. Make incremental changes, like the Infiniti engines introduced in between MMC for Q50. Car not radically different, but it helps one piece at a time.
Depends on how long the production cycle is & how much the company is putting into R&D. My car got a new engine design in its 4th year of production during its mid cycle update. Have three engine upgrades since 2011.
If somebody gave me the parts, I'd bet money could install the turbo myself (and I've only spent a total of about 2 weeks of my life working on cars) - don't even tell me that Honda would have a hard time adding a turbo to the current TLX, stiffening up the suspension, and slapping a "Type S" badge on the back and we (most of us) would all jump for joy that Acura was finally giving us something to get excited about (again).
edit: oh, and give the option of getting the MT 6...
If somebody gave me the parts, I'd bet money could install the turbo myself (and I've only spent a total of about 2 weeks of my life working on cars) - don't even tell me that Honda would have a hard time adding a turbo to the current TLX, stiffening up the suspension, and slapping a "Type S" badge on the back and we (most of us) would all jump for joy that Acura was finally giving us something to get excited about (again).
edit: oh, and give the option of getting the MT 6...
I would take that bet at the drop of a hat if you added & get the car to run correctly, warranty for 4X50, Pass EPA emissions & Get EPA required fuel economy. Anyone can bolt parts onto a car, getting a workable product it the trick. Also you wanted the parts presented to you. Fabricating an acceptable exhaust/intake package just to install the turbo will take more time then you can imagine. Forget about block strength, gaskets, cooling, lubrication & a list that would run off this page.
True story. Respected aftermarket suppliers that had provided product to users for years decided to add a "Big Turbo" product to an car already running twin turbo. One failed after about 18 months of work & the other finally got a decent product after about two year work. Problem was at the end of the day the cost was off the planet for most people.
People with zero experience constantly talk about how easy it would be to do this or that & to people who have actually done some things those comments are a rather big joke. This is not a personal thing at you but a general comment on all the car sites where you read how easy it would be to do this or that by people who have never even welded two pieces of metal together.
Last edited by BEAR-AvHistory; 12-24-2017 at 04:08 PM.
@BEAR-AvHistory myself being a person with "zero experience" installing Turbos, I know this much intuitively : don't add a turbo to your car's engine unless you are ready to deal with "catastrophic engine failure", right? (I'm not saying I'd expect a significant enough failure to require engine rebuild or replacement, just that one should probably be ready to face the risk of increased possibility of that.)
Do I think most people that, just on a whim, think "hey, I should put a turbo on my engine", have a good chance of either giving up, or failing miserably? Yes. I expect there is a two forked challenge facing people who take on this task: Fork 1: Pay somebody else to do it, probably a lot more than most people expect, or want, to pay - Fork 2: Get ready for a possible divorce, if you want to see this one to completion because you've got a lot to learn and a lot of time to spend if you're going to start off as a beginner and try to install it yourself (and follow through to successful completion).
Last edited by Christopher.; 12-24-2017 at 07:45 PM.
@BEAR-AvHistory myself being a person with "zero experience" installing Turbos, I know this much intuitively : don't add a turbo to your car's engine unless you are ready to deal with "catastrophic engine failure", right? (I'm not saying I'd expect a significant enough failure to require engine rebuild or replacement, just that one should probably be ready to face the risk of increased possibility of that.)
Do I think most people that, just on a whim, think "hey, I should put a turbo on my engine", have a good chance of either giving up, or failing miserably? Yes. I expect there is a two forked challenge facing people who take on this task: Fork 1: Pay somebody else to do it, probably a lot more than most people expect, or want, to pay - Fork 2: Get ready for a possible divorce, if you want to see this one to completion because you've got a lot to learn and a lot of time to spend if you're going to start off as a beginner and try to install it yourself (and follow through to successful completion).
Fork 3: Buy a car that is what you really want, and don't fork with it.
... There is *NO* reason the Accord is more advanced than the TLX, even though it comes out sooner. The Accord should always be playing second fiddle, compared to the TLX. Back in the day, Acura was *ALWAYS* ahead of Honda. Hell, the Integra vs Civic... the Integra always had more power and a bigger engine. *ALWAYS*.
But if Honda HQ held back Honda to protect Acura, other car makers will eat Honda's lunch. Everyone has stepped up their game and it's better for Honda to eat Acura's market share than let someone else do it. That said, I agree that there's no reason Acura can't step up its game and maintain a healthy lead over non-premium brands.
An A-Spec retrofitted with a turbo will not be under $50k.
You may first have to reconcile your price point to your desires, and that may mean buying used.
I already bought a 2018 TLX (FWD V6 P-AWS Technology Package), and, I get $500 a month towards the purchase of a new Honda or Acura from the company car plan, so, what would you do in my situation?
I already bought a 2018 TLX (FWD V6 P-AWS Technology Package), and, I get $500 a month towards the purchase of a new Honda or Acura from the company car plan, so, what would you do in my situation?
I can tell you one thing I wouldn't do.... try to retrofit a turbo to my TLX. Cars and especially the control systems are so complex these days. Two weeks of repair work on a 1981 Firebird does not prepare you for extensively modding your TLX. I would get the car I could and wait for another time of my life to try and live my automotive dream. And if that time ever came I would buy it from the factory. I no longer am afflicted by enough hubris to believe that I or any small enterprise can truly out-engineer the OEM. Example: When I bought my TL the dream car for me was an M5. It was out of reach without sacrificing other needs like taking care of the house and education savings for the kids, so I bought the best car I could love and left it alone.
@svtmike Yeah, I'm think'n the TLX is alread a sweet car to be driving kids to school in and picking up groceries - I can take my son to race go karts, play some video games, and I'm good on both angles: having a nice car, and having some thrills. If I could just somehow remove a bit of throttle lag and lower the torque band just a wee bit, and, put fatter grippier tires on, I honestly wouldn't find any fault with my TLX.
Maybe in 5 years I'll I'll get a new accord then the TLX will be our 3rd/spare car then I could put it in the garage and add a DIY $800 "eBay Turbo".
If Acura hasn't come out with a Turbo TLX by five years from now? I dunno, I just can't imagine that scenario. Why would they not? Just wouldn't make sense.
If somebody gave me the parts, I'd bet money could install the turbo myself (and I've only spent a total of about 2 weeks of my life working on cars) - don't even tell me that Honda would have a hard time adding a turbo to the current TLX, stiffening up the suspension, and slapping a "Type S" badge on the back and we (most of us) would all jump for joy that Acura was finally giving us something to get excited about (again).
edit: oh, and give the option of getting the MT 6...
I would take that bet at the drop of a hat if you added & get the car to run correctly, warranty for 4X50, Pass EPA emissions & Get EPA required fuel economy. Anyone can bolt parts onto a car, getting a workable product it the trick. Also you wanted the parts presented to you. Fabricating an acceptable exhaust/intake package just to install the turbo will take more time then you can imagine. Forget about block strength, gaskets, cooling, lubrication & a list that would run off this page.
True story. Respected aftermarket suppliers that had provided product to users for years decided to add a "Big Turbo" product to an car already running twin turbo. One failed after about 18 months of work & the other finally got a decent product after about two year work. Problem was at the end of the day the cost was off the planet for most people.
People with zero experience constantly talk about how easy it would be to do this or that & to people who have actually done some things those comments are a rather big joke. This is not a personal thing at you but a general comment on all the car sites where you read how easy it would be to do this or that by people who have never even welded two pieces of metal together.
He can't do shit (admitted to working on cars a total of 2 weeks of his life). Sure, go bolt in a ready made kit. Oh, one doesn't exist and you have to literally make everything fit properly and you have zero fab skills? Ok, Good luck. I want to watch this disaster unfold. Turbo cars 101 Let me guess- he will tune it himself also, I mean, how hard can it be?
You're on drugs. Did the 3G TL not come with a new engine for the Type S for the last two years of it's model life? Yeah. Good argument. No manufacturer will go with new drivetrains? Heh. Right.
There is *NO* reason the Accord is more advanced than the TLX, even though it comes out sooner.
Seriously? I say that most manufacturers would typically not completely scrap power trains 2 years after they just debuted, (Brand new DI engine and the debut of the 9speed) and you respond with the 1 exception to the general rule, and even better, on a performance variant of the mainstream model?? That's the same thing to you?
Also there is No reason a brand new ground up model should have more features than 1 that debuted more than 3 years earlier? Really? The Accord/TL/X have always been on offset cycles. Don't see them letting either have a life cycle longer than 5 yrs or scrapping either 2yrs after a major, expensive redesign.
BMW/Mercedes may roll out a new engine across their entire line up as soon as possible for reasons related to economies of scale, but it's not a secret that those are the financial reasons why.
Surprised Taco. You usually have much more logical points not so driven by pure emotion, and obvious bias. You sure you aren't on any drugs????
I think I just realized why there’s been so much anxiety around here. You and your cohort actually think Acura cares what you think. I mean, am I reading this incorrectly? You don’t like the direction the brand has been going. You choose to buy something else. What is there to be gained by bitching and crying here all day long?
Keep in mind, many in this thread have such strong opinions on the cars we own, and drive daily with no intention of buying one even with their wishlists in place. Most have never even driven the car, but give great detailed analyses on how it drives.
Not sure to what end; maybe they think they'll convince current owners that we are wrong to be happy with their choice, or that we were wrong to think the TLX met our needs? Kind of baffles me honestly.
12-21-2014, 10:36 PM
Let me guess- he will tune it himself also, I mean, how hard can it be?