[QUOTE=hddnav;15125230]RLX sold only 200 cars last month in the whole country, which is beyond embarrassing for a mainstream, non-exotic, mass-market vehicle./QUOTE]

Excellent point.

Not that the RLX is a bad car, maybe a great car, but Acura is clearly off track with connecting engineering capabilities and what the market wants for a 60K car.

Not saying the market knows what is best, but if they buy blue instead of black then you best make blue. Clearly, Honda has the technical smarts.

 

So the owners of the 4G call the TLX a 3.5G while the owners of the 3G say no thanks to the TLX, and this is all because stick isn't offered?

 

Haha, and don't forget, 4G call it a TSX...

 

Sorry. I just don't see the "ugliness" that certain people harp about. I don't have a problem with it.

 

Along the same lines, in the car dealer today, I look the 2014 TL and the 2015 TLX and cannot fathom how the TL front beak, so to speak is ugly, and the TLX is great. The TLX seems more pronounced but either is a non-issue both look fine. I would even state the TL is more understated.

 

When most people refer to the 4G beak, they are referring to the 2009-2011 beak. The 2012-2014 beak, after the MMC, is no different than any other current Acura beak, including the TLX.

So, you need to refer to earlier 4G photos to fully appreciate what it really means to be prominently beaked!

 

The regular TL looks a little dated IMO. Would like to see some side by side with this.

 

the looks of the '09 - '11 4G was a love it or hate it thing, it seems. I didn't like the front or rear but others love it still.

I liked the '12's facelift and butt-tuck much better, others hated it.

 

No Acura had a more prominent and obnoxious beak than the ZDX. That thing was huge and awful.

Also, my personal reason for saying no thanks to the TLX is because I feel it would be a downgrade from my current car, despite it being new with a bunch of new features.

 

In what way(s) do you see the TLX as a downgrade from the 3G? I see the TLX as an upgrade in every way. If you mean aesthetics, then that's a different story and your personal opinion.

 

It sounds like it doesnt have the performance of the previous TL either. At least not the type S.

 

Because it is .5 seconds or so slower? I guess it all depends on what a person decides performance is. We need to see one against the other in a real comparison though it won't mean much since the 3G Type-S is no longer being made.. but can be had used

 

Saw a TLX this weekend and it is smallish, def compared to TSX and 3G TL size.Sitting next to the 4G TL, you could really see the size difference, nicely built tho, good lines and curves. too small for this husky man but the RLX would suit me fine. Really wish Acura would make a CLX Type-S

 

Suspension design of 3G TL is also superior to the tlx's strut based suspension.

Honestly, although disappointing, what's the surprise? This is just the 1st year model. If Acura releases a true sport model then we sport sedan enthusiasts will be happy. These 1st year models ain't it. Is it a nicer and updated car? Yes. Is it a higher performance sports sedan? No, not yet.

The potential is there. Let's see what Acura does with it. And please stop copying the Lexus' rear end.

 

 

lol @ 3.5G.....in 2007 this was the design the Acura team came up with (TLX), but someone with amazing sales skills convinced leadership of the 4G design. I agree that the 4G ride is amazing, but the look was so love/hate. Most people unfortunately will hate. I still like 4G Black pearl with SH-AWD wheels is a sweet ride. The TLX would have flown off the lots at record numbers in 2009 with this design because it would have still be sorta new age. It may still today but Acura messed up with that ILX. I would kill that and keep the TSX & TL. Just my .02

 

3.5G is the 3G refresh (2007-8), new trans, heads, and minor interior exterior updates like grill, seats, steering wheel, tail lights etc. Anyone calling the 3G a TSX is a ritard. 4G is two steps from the Aztec.

 

I noticed that too and I though it was copied from the ILX. But then again, where did they get the cue for the ILX?

I don't mind the copying if it makes Acura's nicer to look at. Lexus should be flattered.

 

That's kinda the gist of it. But I'm criticizing the styling more than the performance. If it looked like the prototype, then I'd most likely be on board.

It was only meant to be my opinion anyway.

 

If you put the 2 cars side by side, the back ends are not that similar but be sure and tell Lexus to stop copying the Optima! LOL, I swear those are nearly identical... I had that GS and know the back very well.. seeing the Optima from a distance is very close

 

There is only one way to settle the performance arguments... We all know that the Type S goes around Willow Springs in 1:32.88. Some one needs to take the TLX SH-AWD around and compare the times...

 

Where can I buy a new 3G?

 

I'll throw you in my DeLorean and gun it to 88

 

As long as you keep the flux capacitor up to date. I think there has been a firmware update for it.

 

.5 seconds is a pretty big deal. IMO its what makes a car quick vs FAST.
It gives you extra power passing, pulling out in traffic and general excitement when flooring it. I know there are plenty of cars 0-60 faster than the TL-S, so please don't bring up a Mustang or Charger or any of that nonsense. Considering this is the same car from the same manufacturer, I would think there would be a progression in straight line performance not a regression.

 

Source ? If someone actually chose the 4g design over this one they should be banned from working in the industry for life.


Yes sir. If this design came out in 2009(with a little more performance and perhaps a manual) it absolutely would have been the biggest selling acura ever.
Acura could have dominated the Sedan and SUV market (TL and MDX).
Instead, only the MDX dominated and the TL took a nosedive.

 

I can't help but yawn over this issue. It's such an old issue. I heard it over and over with the 4G, the MMC and now, the TLX. The car is QUICK enough to pass, to enter traffic, etc.. just not win a 0-60 race. Oh well, you are not happy with the TLX and I am...it is what it is

I can give you several examples of cars that were not as fast as their predecessors..

 

How many cars are slower 0-60 than their lesser brand counterparts ?
I'm pretty sure the 4 cyl TLX is slower than the 4cyl accord sport which is just wrong.

 

^^ One difficulty is that some Euros don't have lower brands. Lexus and Infiniti do, and I'd imagine that a Maxima is faster than a G25, or a Camry faster than a IS250, or a VW GTi is faster than an A3.

 

Okay, now you are moving the goal posts. Look, over there, a unicorn!

You are making assumptions without knowing the outcome then proclaiming your assumption "wrong"! It matters so much to you.. get a Mustang or Challenger

Hello wall! How are ya?
Hello wall! How are ya?

 

Streets of Willow.. just to be clear.






correlation of 0-60 to power and ability to dynamically accelerate from cruising speed is asinine. There are plenty of cars that might be relatively slow from 0-60, but will blow the fucking doors off most vehicles from 40-100.


The fact that they chose the 4G design period should result in all of them being drug out in the snow to get the shit kicked out of them before being put out of their misery.

 

Sorry man... It actually was the Willows Springs track.

Article scans

http://www.clublexus.com/forums/car-...racetrack.html

 

1) Do you seriously fucking think an Acura TL did willow in 1:32.. that's faster a 911 GT3.

2) Article is wrong.. watch the vid:

 

Around the 24s spot they even explicitly show a map of the course.. streets of willow, not willow.

 

Yes because we all spend so much time going 60-100. This isn't fast and furious dude, most guys have this car as their daily driver.

 

I would take the tlx over my 04 TL any day ..But I will find way to show my exhaust tips

 

You have comprehension issues to put it nicely.. fast and furious..

I legally travel 70-85 mph on a daily basis. I routinely get passed by people going over 90 mph. Just because you live in some part of the country where the speed limit isn't over 60 and full of law-abiding citizens, don't assume it's not a daily occurrence for others.. and what does driving a TL as your daily have anything to do with speed? It's okay to go an excess of 60 mph if your DD is a 'vette?

 

You are in the minority. I would bet the majority of owners of these cars drive max 65- 70 mph. You would have no license consistently driving 85 MPH in the tri state area. Point is -- 0-60 is far more important than 40-100.

 

It is more important to you, and YOU sir, are in the minority and that is okay. You want what you want out of a car.

I think you are assuming much. By your standards, the vast majority of cars are not driven over 70 mph... I find that laughable.. here in Houston. 70 mph will get you run over. That said, I come up on Porsches, Jags, AMGs and Vette's going 65 on the freeway from time to time..

I went out and drove the TLX again, this time I jumped on it right out of the driveway. I don't know what the timing was but I do know it got to 60 fast enough to know that it will have no trouble in Houston traffic.

Now, why is getting to 60 so fast so important if you are just driving in city traffic? I will just assume you are trying to impress the cars at the red lights by getting to 60 faster than them just to have to hit your brakes for the next red light...

I just don't know any more

 

Duh...