Great suggestion on using the Sport+ setting in order to best illustrate the problem. I did this yesterday with my service advisor and it worked great to show the issue -- the advisor immediately felt the 2-3 kick and wrote that up in the documentation afterward (good to have that independently verified, in writing). Also, I found that the jolt was most obvious around 3,000-3,500 RPM.

So I've just sent all this off to ACR (my first communication with them...I think I've got my ducks in a row in terms of arguments and evidence, but I expect the standard pushback. We'll see.)

Also, thanks for the Edmunds article. I have a growing set of "professional" citations of this issue -- most obtained from links provided in this forum -- which clearly shows that it's not just some little thing. I'll bring all those to bear at the appropriate time, if needed, and force Acura to explain why they're all wrong.

I am not letting this go until it's resolved.

 

I will say this. I have had my SH-AWD for 3 months and have about 2000 miles. The first few weeks were great, but it is like as time goes on the tranny gets dumber, maybe it has Alzheimer's since as it gets older it forgets basic things it used to know or should know. I have NEVER owned a car where I felt the tranny made the car unsafe. At this point I might as well be driving and ES350 since my driving style has gone "old man Lexus style" as I can not make any quick driving actions that would rely on the tranny reacting quickly and/or accurately. Almost every day there is some point where I go to accelerate and the engine spools up, but the tranny/torque converter seem to lag in doing anything. Other times as the car is coming to a rolling stop if you go to accelerate the tranny again becomes confused. Als there are time if I am coasting the tranny can become confused and slam between gears basically jolting the power train. Thank goodness I don't drive a lot anymore and we use her 16 RDX Advance AWD which drives flawlessly. As much as I wanted to come back to Acura after a 2 car absence, if this tranny is in the MMC then I will head to Infiniti, Audi or possibly one of the Koreans.

As much as I want to believe some of this is the programming each manufacturer implements I have to a lot of blame on ZF, WHAT A PIECE OF CRAP. I equate this to computers, sure dozens of people make computers, but they base it off an Intel reference design that gives them the building blocks they need. Clearly ZF designed such a piece of crap and provided such poor reference guidance that Chrysler/Jeep and Acura are F'ed. Is anyone using this ZF successfully?

 

Keith, this was my experience as well. The transmission got worse as time went by.

 

I don't know I'm down on Acura as a whole over this, but I'll take a bus before getting another car with any kind of ZF tranny in it.

But I think Acura is screwing themselves by not being more aggressive in making this right. I currently own three Acuras, recently owned a fourth, and add two Hondas to that as well. Loved them all. Honda/Acura would have been my brand of choice for a long time. After this, I will give a lot more consideration to Lexus, Infiniti, and others (more so now that Lexus seems to be fixing what felt was awful interior design the past 3-4 years).

Unless they replace the tranny I'll be looking to get out of it as soon as I can without losing my shirt.

 

Guys, I'm not really savy when it comes to leasing cars. My current TLX is a lease. Let's say I take the car to Lexus for example. Will they buy out my lease and factor it into my next purchase?

My main concern is with my lease kilometres. When I first leased, I had an office job that didn't require driving at all. Now I'm on the road 80% of my day. I know there's a penalty for returning at the end of the lease if you're over the KM allowance. But what if another dealer buys out your lease... does that matter?

 

Miles only matter if you return the leased vehicle. If you decide to buy it or trade it in, excess miles dont matter. If you trade it in, however, there is a chance that you owe more than the cars' value especially in the early part of the lease.

What most people dont know is even at the end of your lease, you can actually still trade it in instead of turning it in. Heck, even take it to carmax and see what they offer. You may even end up making a profit if they offer you more than the payoff amount. Of course this probability will get higher the closer you are to the end of the lease term especially for cars with high resale value... ie lexus, acura.

 

Ha, maybe a RDX or MDX, but these TLX V6s I suspect are going to,suck as the tranny issues re going to impact resale.

 

I think mondster covered it pretty well - I recently made a serious inquiry about trading out of my lease into an RDX. The way the offer was presented was that I "owed" about 36K still on the lease and the car's trade in value was ~$32K. So the issue is that difference (whatever it is) does need to get paid for and rolls into your next deal. So trading in a lease is not unlike trading in a purchase - they assess what you owe vs. trade in value. The problem with a lease is that you are basically paying for the depreciation evenly over the term of the lease, but the car's actual depreciation falls quickly initially, and slows down. Technically speaking, if the market can be trusted then end of your lease marks the point where what it's worth = what you "owe". Until then, you are likely looking at having to make up some kind of deficit.

 

My old TLX was sold a few days after the dealership took it back. They did nothing to it other than wash it and put it on the lot

 

Did you leave the rims on it? It was a sharp looking car as long as they didn't take it for an extended test drive!

 

Yes, I did leave them on the car since they wouldn't fit the RLX. I bought the car with those rims as part of the purchase anyway.

I was told the guy that bought my car was swayed by the rims and the fact it was lowered.

I think I even saw it on the road a couple of weeks ago. I wish I could catch him while parking and talk to him

 

You can probably have a decent chat during that 2-3 shift pause....

 

Thanks my man, I did not know you could "trade in" a lease instead of returning it with excess mileage. In that case, wouldn't it be better to always opt for the lowest amount of mileage when negotiating a new lease? I hope that trick works up here in Canada... lol.

 

Thats what i do: opt for the lowest mileage. But then you're not always sure what your cars' actual value would be at the end of the lease. Basically explore all options and decide on which one will yield you the lowest loss.

Btw, with acura, if you return a lease and get a new one, they will forgive half of your excess miles up to 15k. So another thing to consider before trading in/selling or returning.

 

I had a meeting with the GM (seemed like a nice guy) and the service manager yesterday. The service manager still insisted the car shifts normal and it's just that I don't like how it shifts. So I asked him in person if it's normal, then why are there so many updates in attempt to fix what's normal. His reply was well it's just like a phone, you get updates all the time even when nothing is wrong..LOL. I wanted to confront him but ended up holding off. The GM eventually suggested to have a tech from Acura come take a look but if the tech deems the car is fine then there's not much to do. I also mentioned how I heard others have had their transmission replaced and they said I shouldn't believe everything on the internet. So I told them that's true but if someone is posting their invoices showing their transmission was swapped then it's kind of hard not to believe it. Anyways, the GM is going to get back to me when the Acura tech is coming in and I would love to speak to them directly. I just hope they agree there is something off with the transmission and not the "it's working within normal specification" speech. I just want this whole thing be done with.

 

So I heard back from ACR today. A field rep went to the dealership and drove my car. I got the "the transmission is within specification" speech and they will do nothing.

So Acura has done more than lost a customer, they've gained an enemy. I think I'll vent in a letter to corporate just to make myself feel better, and the minute I can financially get out of this car and into something not called "Acura" I will. I was willing to be loyal if they made an attempt to make it right and they chose not to. My wife can drive an Acura if she wants. I won't. They won't see a penny from me for a long, long time.

 

Did you ask them to put that in writing?

 

I'm with you and in my last Acura too. I'll drive this RLX for a year or so then bye bye. If Acura would just have ponied up and been honest and at least pretended to care about our concerns.. instead, they are going to reap the harvest what they have sewn. They can "have a good drown, as they go down, all alone.... dragged down by the stone.." (Pink Ffoyd reference)

 

It was a phone call, but I'll ask tomorrow to get something. I'd expect it to be on the paperwork.

I find in infuriating that any field rep would drive that car and say it's in spec. But really that means nothing - a crappy transmission "in spec" just means it failing exactly as it was designed to. Doesn't mean it's OK. What's worse is I seem to be out of recourse with ACR.

 

IMO, a simple "We are aware of the issues some of you are having and we are working diligently to take care of this, thank you for your patience." type of response would have gone a long way for me. Instead, all I got was a run around from Acura (ACR) and they kept pushing the issue back on the dealership that had no idea what to do about the problem.

This is on the back of Acura corporate but all of Acura will suffer to some degree for it.

 

At the dealer right now waiting for my test drive with the tech let's see how this goes.

 

I agree. I'm not an unreasonable person, and I have been really happy with my TSX, MDX and RDX. I really wanted to be happy with the TLX too. They actually needed to do very little to retain my loyalty, but they wouldn't even go that far. But there are a lot of very excellent cars out there in this price range, and now I'll be looking at all of them.

I don't get it. $3K and I would have spent the next 2 years saying how happy I was with how Acura resolved it. Now I will be doing just the opposite.

 

This is called risk management and problem containment, i.e.,

a) what would it cost if a problem was admitted (worst case multiple transmissions replaced, the associated labour costs, and guaranteed negative reliability stats).

vs

b) how much business would be lost if a problem was not admitted, and only provide a replacement transmission to the hard core cases.

Question is "what is a hard core case". For arguments sake lets say they have sold 30,000 9AT's over the last year. Of these:
60% operate smoothly
30% have a slight bump at times
9% have an annoying bump (but still driveable, aka "shifts normally")
1% have an unacceptable jerk (qualify for a replacement)

If the 1% is "hard core" case that might be 300 transmissions replaced. Based on this forum that seems high. If 10% was "hard core" case (admitting to a problem), it would mean at least 3,000 replacements and maybe many of the next 30%. This would be a major hit to quality statistics.

The projection for lost sales and repeat buyers is just a wild guess.

 

Just drove with the tech and reproduced all issue slowness hard shifts laggs he logged all data and told the rep and manager there is defiently something wrong. They will get back to me soon on what they will do

 

Acura can certainly afford to lose some customers. I get people asking my why I don't have the TLX any longer, I let them know my opinion. Word of mouth is just one the intangibles that Acura will also have to deal with.

Social media complaints and negative reviews are others.

Oh well

 

Such is the case for any quality issue on any car. Clearly they've made the business case decision to suffer the consequences of on-going negative publicity. But since they seem to have fixed this in the later builds, those of us stuck on the front-end will fade into the noise over time.

At the end of the day all we can do is vote with our wallet. I will, and I'll let them know it. But I'll tell you what - I'll not be shy about bashing this transmission enthusiastically and frequently for the next 2 years.

 

I have never driven a car that every day you drive it the tranny makes it self known the way this car does. If this is the option at MMC or in the Type-S then I may check out the new A4 in a few years when this lease is up.

 

My tranny problems have re-surfaced, as well. After several weeks of near smooth sailing, we're basically, back to zero. The one thing I will say, is that it's much less noticeable, when the engine reaches operating temperature; still, there's a problem that needs addressing. Called, my 2 ACR's in California, & left messages detailing my newest transgressions. lets see what happens
Happy holidays!

 

Put mine in Sport the other day, and the shifts are a ton better.

Suggests to me that all they need to do is move the shift point up the rev scale. IOW, don't force the 2-3 shift at too low RPM.

.
.

 

I did a bunch of stop and go's a while back and observed the problem area is between 2K and maybe 3.2K. If the shift point is above or below it's near perfect. What's puzzling that in Sport+, forcing the shift even at 3.5-4K is still horrible.

One of my new avenues to attack the problem with Acura is that Sport+ mode is virtually unusable unless you are just flat out willing to overlook what happens between 2-3. I think an unusable mode is a problem.

 

sports plus it what i used today and reproduced all symptoms, still waiting on them to hear the verdict.

 

Agreed. I started using Sport mode, which is rather weak compared to,how other brands shift in sport mode, but the shifts have dramatically improved. Still amazed at the sluggishness of the shifts and the occasional slam down shift. I will eventually add my name to the pile by letting dealer know at my first service and writing letter to Acura. I don't expect anything to happen since mine is not very bad, I am sure I will get told it is working within spec.

 

Today I felt what it is like to drive a TLX with no 2-3 shifting issues.... I got a 2016 TLX V6 as a loaner. lol. I got the loaner because I had to take care of this problem (again). See posts 31 and 32 : https://acurazine.com/forums/problem...ailure-931335/

The TLX was a flippin' joy to drive. I drove it in the same rush-hour traffic I normally do ... stop and go for about 30 miles on the way home (the drive to work wasn't too stop and go today). Never felt any harsh shifts. I almost cried. Then I did when I remembered I had to return it.

As an update, I have to admit that after having TSB 40 applied a month or so ago, the car no longer slammed up the 2-3 shift. It was more like it held the gear too long before the shift... almost like a weak parachute/rubber band effect others have mentioned in the past. On a level of annoyance the original abrupt shift was probably a 6-7 where 10 would be the most annoying. After TSB 40 was applied, I'd say the annoyance was "only" a 3-5. Lastly, once I felt how awesomely the 2016 shifted, I called and left a message with the dealership asking what was different about the TLX I was driving as a loaner from the debacle of a transmission in mine. I received no direct answer or response via phone, so when I went to pick the car up, I asked the service rep. I still don't know what the answer to that question is. However, he mentioned they did another idle learn on the car. On the invoice : "PERFORMED IDLE LEARN PERFORMED TRANS TEACH IN" as part of the repair mentioned above. My initial reaction on the drive home was that it still isn't as near-flawless as the 2016 was, but there may have been an improvement. I won't know until I start driving it on my usual stop and go route to work.

FYI : this apparently was the 11th 2016 TLX made (if I remember my VIN decoding correctly).

 

I'm just reading through the documentation I got from the dealership. They describe doing a second idle relearn, and then the following: "DPSM road tested vehicle completion stated vehicle has similar characteristics with like models."

So here is the flaw in that argument - the car DOES operate correctly after an idle relearn in Econ/Normal/Sport. The problem is it only lasts a couple weeks. Also, this time I took the opportunity to test the shift in Sport+ right after a relearn and it's just as bad as before - no change what so ever. So what's puzzling is that shifting in one of the automatic modes after a relearn is great, but manually shifting is the same.

And to claim it's the same as "like models" is just a lie or a hollow statement. Clearly it is not similar to a late build 2015 or a 2016. It's also a useless statement to claim "its just as bad as all the other ones who are also bad".

Aside from my angry letter to Acura I'm probably done with this. I'll learn to live with it and work around it until I can just get into something else.

 

Have you considered escalating this higher like ACR manager if there's such thing or going to the media or tell them you're going to the media regarding this. Even if it doesn't get their attention, at least you can make more people aware of this issue and how Acura is not doing much to resolve it.

 

That's code for "we know it's not working correctly but we can't admit it for liability reasons."

I would ask them why a car that's working up to spec needs to have the idle relearn process done multiple times.

When you do trade for another brand you should take a picture of you shaking hands with the Audi/Lexus/Whatever sales guy and email it to them!

 

I asked the ACR rep if I had any other recourse within Acura - he basically said no. I'm tempted to file something with the NTSB because unlike a lot of people, my transmission has actually failed once where it went into Park while moving.

Although my motivation is waning. If I felt like there was an avenue that would lead to a change I'd pursue it. But I haven't figured out the magic phrase that leads to a transmission replacement which is really what I want.

For now, I'm probably going to keep complaining about it every time my car goes into service.

 

Yep.

It's a valid point about the relearn - not sure why they keep doing it if they know it doesn't fix anything. But your first comment is exactly what is going on - they know this is a problem, they don't have a fix, so the only statement they can make is "its just like the others" to avoid implicating themselves.

 

I would have traded the damn car in and be done with if the value didn't drop $10k+. I was curious and had it appraised at an Acura dealership. It's a SH-AWD tech with 7 months of ownership with only 6.5km on it. It's in perfect cosmetic condition and also has oem back sensors installed. Brought it for $46k and was told its worth around $31-33k LOL. The sales person said it's because 2016 is out and also some buyers are aware of the transmission issue in the 2015 models. This is in Canada.

 

But our cars don't have transmission problems, right? Everything is in spec......

Our cars are nearly identical - mine just a bit older. I got the same story. mine was a full $12k drop from purchase price.