2021/2022 TLX versus the Competition
#281
Three Wheelin'
RIP to more sedans ![Why Me](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/smilies/whyme.gif)
![Why Me](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/smilies/whyme.gif)
Hyundai Sonata, Kia Stinger, And K5 To Be Axed In The US: Report
The Sonata will apparently be discontinued globally at the end of the current generation's life cycle.
https://www-motor1-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.motor1.com/news/587921/sonata-stinger-k5-axed-us/amp/?amp_gsa=1&_js_v=a9&usqp=mq331AQIKAGwASCAAgM%3D
The following users liked this post:
Tony Pac (05-27-2022)
#282
Burning Brakes
^^ Unless they start dumping hybrids/EVs in all crossovers/SUV starting next year, I have absolutely no interest in owning 2+ gas guzzling space monsters ... this goes for all car companies. Make sedans more functional.
#283
Safety Car
![rofl](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/smilies/rofl.gif)
Everyone and their mom went out and got a gas guzzler.
Lacking was thier memory of what happened when everyone went out to get gas guzzlers between 2003-2008? Used lots Full of unselling gas guzzlers? You couldnt pay people to buy them. Anyone remember Cash for Clunkers(guzzlers)?
We haven't even began the next recession.
The following users liked this post:
MarcoTLX (05-27-2022)
#284
Burning Brakes
When you launch from a dead stop, you can brake torque/clutch dump and load up the engine. That way as soon as you start moving, your turbos are already spooled up and engine is already in the power band, allowing you to make close to max power (traction notwithstanding). When you start from a roll, your engine is in the lower part of the rev range, which means you make relatively little power, and it takes time for your engine revs to build up to the point where it starts to make max power. Turbo and AWD cars especially will have 0-60 times that are much lower than their 5-60 times.
5-60 times is not simply 0-60 times minus 0-5 times. And even if it is, it'd only shave off a couple tenths, not a couple seconds.
5-60 times is not simply 0-60 times minus 0-5 times. And even if it is, it'd only shave off a couple tenths, not a couple seconds.
But no ... I'm doing any of that (sounds like a simulated Launch Control to me) .
I'm just flooring the accelerator (and starting the stop-watch) ... from either a stop or a 5-mph roll. I click stop watch again when speedometer says 60 .
Took the wife's 2020 Q5-e Hybrid in for it's yearly service. Still has less than 5000 miles.
They have some new cars, but mostly (nice, clean, CPO) used ones.
Sat in a RS e-Tron GT sedan ... just wow.
Last edited by Tesla1856; 05-26-2022 at 11:38 AM. Reason: more info
#285
Three Wheelin'
People are now thinking of dumping the loans they got on their massive trucks and SUVs for a sedan. ![rofl](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/smilies/rofl.gif)
Everyone and their mom went out and got a gas guzzler.
Lacking was thier memory of what happened when everyone went out to get gas guzzlers between 2003-2008? Used lots Full of unselling gas guzzlers? You couldnt pay people to buy them. Anyone remember Cash for Clunkers(guzzlers)?
We haven't even began the next recession.
![rofl](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/smilies/rofl.gif)
Everyone and their mom went out and got a gas guzzler.
Lacking was thier memory of what happened when everyone went out to get gas guzzlers between 2003-2008? Used lots Full of unselling gas guzzlers? You couldnt pay people to buy them. Anyone remember Cash for Clunkers(guzzlers)?
We haven't even began the next recession.
#286
Thanks. Yes I suppose that would explain it.
But no ... I'm doing any of that (sounds like a simulated Launch Control to me) .
I'm just flooring the accelerator (and starting the stop-watch) ... from either a stop or a 5-mph roll. I click stop watch again when speedometer says 60 .
Took the wife's 2020 Q5-e Hybrid in for it's yearly service. Still has less than 5000 miles.
They have some new cars, but mostly (nice, clean, CPO) used ones.
Sat in a RS e-Tron GT sedan ... just wow.
But no ... I'm doing any of that (sounds like a simulated Launch Control to me) .
I'm just flooring the accelerator (and starting the stop-watch) ... from either a stop or a 5-mph roll. I click stop watch again when speedometer says 60 .
Took the wife's 2020 Q5-e Hybrid in for it's yearly service. Still has less than 5000 miles.
They have some new cars, but mostly (nice, clean, CPO) used ones.
Sat in a RS e-Tron GT sedan ... just wow.
The following 2 users liked this post by fiatlux:
ELIN (05-26-2022),
richii0207 (05-26-2022)
#287
Burning Brakes
#288
AZ Community Team
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Posts: 3,451
Received 1,613 Likes
on
971 Posts
RIP to more sedans ![Why Me](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/smilies/whyme.gif)
![Why Me](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/smilies/whyme.gif)
Hyundai Sonata, Kia Stinger, And K5 To Be Axed In The US: Report
The Sonata will apparently be discontinued globally at the end of the current generation's life cycle.
https://www-motor1-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.motor1.com/news/587921/sonata-stinger-k5-axed-us/amp/?amp_gsa=1&_js_v=a9&usqp=mq331AQIKAGwASCAAgM%3DIt's kinda sad but Stinger was deemed to get axed from day one as the sales numbers are beyond low. But I am surprised about Sonata. Accord and Camry are still the doing well.
The following users liked this post:
MarcoTLX (05-27-2022)
#289
Adept Acura Enthusiast
I love sedans but they are pretty impractical in many ways. But I also don't have a need for a large SUV and even with most crossovers I just don't care for the driving dynamics, so it leaves me in an odd spot. A hatchback or liftback would be a great option but that severely cuts down on my choices.
#290
Drifting
Agree. I just don't like the size, mpg and the "tippy" feeling of driving an SUV. The RDX is the first one I've driven that I'd consider. With AWD, it feels pretty light on its feet, and its CG is not so high that it feels like it wants to flip on its side on curvy roads. MPG is still a downside, however.
The following users liked this post:
MarcoTLX (05-27-2022)
#291
Agree. I just don't like the size, mpg and the "tippy" feeling of driving an SUV. The RDX is the first one I've driven that I'd consider. With AWD, it feels pretty light on its feet, and its CG is not so high that it feels like it wants to flip on its side on curvy roads. MPG is still a downside, however.
The following users liked this post:
jjsC5 (06-19-2022)
#292
Three Wheelin'
The fuel efficiency difference is overblown. A 2mpg difference on the highway for the RDX vs the TLX is not going to amount to much in the grand scheme of things. If you drive 10K highway miles a year, and if gas is $6/gallon, that's only $150/year. For folks buying $45K cars, that's likely not a material difference. And realistically for most people the cost difference is even smaller seeing as how they get identical city MPGs.
#293
A redesigned Accord is coming out this Fall also. And if the new Pilot and the other Honda models are any indication, it may just take a bit of TLX sales away.
Maybe for highway but it is a huge difference for us all city drivers and many RDX drivers are getting 15-17 mpg, that's abysmal.
Maybe for highway but it is a huge difference for us all city drivers and many RDX drivers are getting 15-17 mpg, that's abysmal.
#294
Burning Brakes
Hey, so how are you liking your 2020 V60 T8 Polestar Engineered Hybrid ( a few years into ownership now). Are you planning on keeping it?
My brother is thinking of buying a new Polestar-2 full-EV sedan. Probably the cheaper FWD one with the single-motor.
#295
First, let me just saw that mechanically the TLX has been pretty good. Electrics had a few hiccups; one of the key fobs stopped working, had a grounding issue that resulted in limp mode, and the battery died in under 3 years. None of those have been dealbreakers, but the Acura dealership experience was less than stellar. Volvo isn't that great either compared to the rest of the luxury field, but so far it's been pretty good, they've always been responsive to any of my concerns, and most importantly they seem to want to make things right. The Acura dealerships I've gone to have defaulted to blaming the problem on the customers first and don't seem interested in customer retention. I've had two minor things that needed to be fixed on the Volvo, and both were resolved with a software update. Both times, and for the 3 free service visits, I got loaners without a problem. With Acura it was 50/50.
Fit and finish wise the Volvo has been near perfect which puts it above the TLX. My TLX had a misaligned fuel door, misaligned sunroof gasket, and taillights with pretty noticable uneven gaps. There just doesn't seem to be much attention to detail or quality control in Ohio. However, there's been no rattles or creaks in either (60K miles on the TLX, 35K miles on the Volvo), so build quality seems like a wash.
Interior wise the Volvo wins hands down. Both in terms of material choice and design, it's right up there with the Germans. Nothing on the Acura feels cheap, but nothing on it feels luxury quality either. It's firmly premium, which is exactly where the car is positioned, so that's that. I have no real complaints about the TLX interior other than some blanks (there isn't a single blank on my Volvo), but the Volvo is still by far the nicer car to be in. The only quibble I have with the Volvo interior is that the window switches and sunroof button feels cheap. I think it might actually be the same parts used in older Ford-era Volvos. Aside from that, everything else feels properly luxury.
The gas engine and transmission is probably the weakest part of the Volvo. The supercharged and turbocharged 2.0L sounds coarse and unrefined, and is nowhere near as smooth as other 2.0Ts. Nobody makes a 4-banger quite like Honda. Fortunately though I don't have to rely on the gas engine thanks to the electric motor. As for the transmission, the 8DCT is much more responsive. The Aisin 8AT in the Volvo is smooth, but slow to respond and there's a noticable dip in power between 1st and 2nd gear shifts. When there's battery power available, the ISG will fill in during that shift so it's not noticable, but when the battery is flat it's very noticable. What's strange is that the T6 models that don't have the electric motor but the same gas motor and transmission doesn't exhibit this behavior.
Performance, the Volvo wins hands down but that should be no surprise, since it has double the power. Brakes are much better too; the blended regenerative/friction brakes is nice and smooth. I would imagine the Polestar's blended braking system would be just as good.
Comfortwise on the road I'd give the nod to the TLX. Its ride is more supple, and it's quieter. The Volvo does handle better, but the steering is numb and uncommunicative even if it's more competant, and it rides a lot stiffer, even with the dampers set up for comfort. The TLX is a great highway cruiser; the Volvo is merely a good highwayd cruiser.
Tech and features wouldn't be a fair comparison since the Volvo is about 5 years newer, so it's not surprising that it soundly bests the TLX. The B&W sound system is tops, it has a digital dash, the infotainment is pretty quick and responsive, the ACC and Pilot Assist works pretty well, and it has everything I can ask for. The only change I wish is for the BLIS to have an audible alert; unlike the TLX that beeps, the alert is only a flashing light on the mirror. That said, the TLX features and tech feel dated; infotainment is old, rear view cam is low vis, etc. But again, it's older. However, there are a few things that have annoyed me with the TLX because it's a constant reminder that it was built to a price point. First, no Carplay/AA. Most of the competition had it at that point, and hell even Hondas had it. Secondly, no keyless access door sensors for the rear doors. It couldn't possibly have cost them that much to add those in, and the omission is just a reminder that Acura left it out to cut costs. Thirdly, the parking brake doesn't automatically engage when you turn off the car. Really wish they would have added that in since it wouldn't have cost anything extra since it's just simple software programming.
Practicality has been very good, even excluding it being a wagon. The amount of passenger space is better than the TLX even though it's a smaller car. One annoyance though is that there's basically no center console storage; it's about 1 inch deep because the battery takes up the entire space.
Looks are subjective, but I still think it's one of the best looking cars on the road today. Usually cars starting losing its luster for me after about a year of ownership; in this case I still very much like the car and unless the dealership starts dropping the ball or things start falling apart, I think I'll continue liking it for many years to come.
Last edited by fiatlux; 05-27-2022 at 09:14 PM.
The following users liked this post:
Tesla1856 (05-29-2022)
#297
#298
Three Wheelin'
You drove a TLX, correct? What was your commute like and MPG?
#299
Three Wheelin'
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Posts: 1,494
Received 869 Likes
on
413 Posts
I believe he has a 2016 TLX 2.4. My 2016 and 2018 2.4 TLXs had good fuel economy, around its 10.0 litres/100 km rating in the city, and excellent highway fuel economy, around 7.0 litres/100 km, or better. My current 2021 TLX with the 2.0 turbo and heavier weight adds another 10 percent fuel consumption to those numbers.
#300
Senior Moderator
The 2UR V8 is pretty much the main reason why I have my name on the waitlist for an IS500. I've yet to drive it, but I have driven both the RC-F and IS350 F-Sport. Even if the car is simply an IS350 F-Sport with a motor swap (it sounds like it's more than just that), I'd be more than happy with that. Even if the IS500 were slower than the Type S (it's not), I'd still prefer it because of that motor. Neither cars are track cars, so the track numbers don't matter much to me, but for me as a daily driver the IS500 is going to be much more enjoyable thanks to the motor. The touchscreen infotainment system, build quality, and better customer service is just the cherry on top.
Looks like Sam is moving on from his 500:
#301
The following users liked this post:
bilirubin (06-03-2022)
#302
#303
Senior Moderator
![Nod](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/smilies/nod.gif)
If only Tesla could get the QC program in order, the Model 3 performance winds up being the offering of choice (to me) in this segment.
#304
AZ Community Team
Thread Starter
![Nod](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/smilies/nod.gif)
If only Tesla could get the QC program in order, the Model 3 performance winds up being the offering of choice (to me) in this segment.
I did see that the Soul does come in an electric model now. I don’t think she would ever consider one moving forward as she wants an Acura RDX next but I was surprised to see the Soul EV the other day. The EV badge was crooked so I had thought the driver slapped it on the back as I thought the car didn’t exist. 😅
#305
I had to drive my girlfriends KIA Soul today and she told me not to abuse the car. I’m not sure what abuse she was speaking of because slamming the gas doesn’t do a thing. 🤣
I did see that the Soul does come in an electric model now. I don’t think she would ever consider one moving forward as she wants an Acura RDX next but I was surprised to see the Soul EV the other day. The EV badge was crooked so I had thought the driver slapped it on the back as I thought the car didn’t exist. 😅
I did see that the Soul does come in an electric model now. I don’t think she would ever consider one moving forward as she wants an Acura RDX next but I was surprised to see the Soul EV the other day. The EV badge was crooked so I had thought the driver slapped it on the back as I thought the car didn’t exist. 😅
#307
![Nod](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/smilies/nod.gif)
If only Tesla could get the QC program in order, the Model 3 performance winds up being the offering of choice (to me) in this segment.
#308
The crazy thing is Toyota offers the Supra aka Z4 which is much quicker and can still bring home impressive mpgs. Reliabilty is definitely sus but if Toyota is comfortable putting the engine in their car it had to pass some sort of reliability tests, but all the BMW fan boys rave about the B58. It's a shame all these car brands appear to be hitter their stride in offering performance, sound, and improved reliability right at the time of the big push for EVs.
The following 2 users liked this post by tsxV6:
KrylonBlue (06-06-2022),
MarcoTLX (06-06-2022)
#309
Senior Moderator
Were you beating people who weren't racing? A 7.4 second to 60 isn't going to dust any GTI, Civic SI, or a Fist/Fost. Let's get back to the claim, why would a GTI want to even consider racing a Leaf? If the GTI was actually "racing" it wouldn't be a race. GTI's stock are just under 6 to 60. I'm calling BS all day on this one.
#311
Senior Moderator
Dialing down to the 2.0T level, I was just reading about MB's new C300 4Matic in Car & Driver yesterday:
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...c-class-drive/
Seems like it tested out with pretty respectable numbers for the entry level C and better than the advertised performance on MBUSA.
I wonder if MB is starting to go more the way of underrating as does BMW seeing as the power:weight of this is in line with the TLX 2.0T SH-AWD but produces better performance...or maybe the 2.0T just needs the Type S version of the 10AT.![Shrug](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/smilies/shrug.gif)
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...c-class-drive/
Seems like it tested out with pretty respectable numbers for the entry level C and better than the advertised performance on MBUSA.
I wonder if MB is starting to go more the way of underrating as does BMW seeing as the power:weight of this is in line with the TLX 2.0T SH-AWD but produces better performance...or maybe the 2.0T just needs the Type S version of the 10AT.
![Shrug](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/smilies/shrug.gif)
#312
Dialing down to the 2.0T level, I was just reading about MB's new C300 4Matic in Car & Driver yesterday:
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...c-class-drive/
Seems like it tested out with pretty respectable numbers for the entry level C and better than the advertised performance on MBUSA.
I wonder if MB is starting to go more the way of underrating as does BMW seeing as the power:weight of this is in line with the TLX 2.0T SH-AWD but produces better performance...or maybe the 2.0T just needs the Type S version of the 10AT.![Shrug](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/smilies/shrug.gif)
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...c-class-drive/
Seems like it tested out with pretty respectable numbers for the entry level C and better than the advertised performance on MBUSA.
I wonder if MB is starting to go more the way of underrating as does BMW seeing as the power:weight of this is in line with the TLX 2.0T SH-AWD but produces better performance...or maybe the 2.0T just needs the Type S version of the 10AT.
![Shrug](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/smilies/shrug.gif)
The following users liked this post:
F23A4 (06-17-2022)
#313
The acceleration disparity is almost entirely due to the inability of the TLX to launch hard and get off the line. Looking at the numbers, the trap speeds are almost identical (97mph vs 98mph) which is a good sign that power-to-weight is similar. Also, the 5-60 numbers are almost identical as well (6.4s vs 6.5s). I don’t think it’s an issue with the 10AT; I think it’s more of a limitation of the SH-AWD system because we know that in both the RDX and TLX the ECU has to pull power in first gear whereas there’s no such issue with the same engine and transmission in the Accord.
#314
I agree, I've always said that the TLX feels faster than the 0-60 numbers would have you believe. Admittedly the car is a bit of a dog off the line, but once it gets going it actually pulls pretty well in the mid range. Top-end it does run out of steam, but overall I have no problems with the motor itself; it's the weight of the car and reduced power in lower gears that holds this car back in a straight line.
The following users liked this post:
MarcoTLX (06-17-2022)
#315
That's a $22 difference per fill up with my area's premium gasoline pricing. That's money I'll never see again every week (sometimes twice!).
#316
I think that may need to redo your math. If you're paying an extra $22 per week, that comes out to $1144 per year. Even at $7 per gallon, that comes out to 163 gallons. If you're using that much more gas at 29mpg than 33mpg, you would need to be driving 39K miles per year (X/29 - X/33)*7 = 22*52, solve for X, X = 39,100.
The following users liked this post:
Jim2301 (06-23-2022)
#317
AZ Community Team
Dialing down to the 2.0T level, I was just reading about MB's new C300 4Matic in Car & Driver yesterday:
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...c-class-drive/
Seems like it tested out with pretty respectable numbers for the entry level C and better than the advertised performance on MBUSA.
I wonder if MB is starting to go more the way of underrating as does BMW seeing as the power:weight of this is in line with the TLX 2.0T SH-AWD but produces better performance...or maybe the 2.0T just needs the Type S version of the 10AT.![Shrug](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/smilies/shrug.gif)
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...c-class-drive/
Seems like it tested out with pretty respectable numbers for the entry level C and better than the advertised performance on MBUSA.
I wonder if MB is starting to go more the way of underrating as does BMW seeing as the power:weight of this is in line with the TLX 2.0T SH-AWD but produces better performance...or maybe the 2.0T just needs the Type S version of the 10AT.
![Shrug](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/smilies/shrug.gif)
![Werd](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/smilies/werd.gif)
The following users liked this post:
KrylonBlue (06-17-2022)
#318
The acceleration disparity is almost entirely due to the inability of the TLX to launch hard and get off the line. Looking at the numbers, the trap speeds are almost identical (97mph vs 98mph) which is a good sign that power-to-weight is similar. Also, the 5-60 numbers are almost identical as well (6.4s vs 6.5s). I don’t think it’s an issue with the 10AT; I think it’s more of a limitation of the SH-AWD system because we know that in both the RDX and TLX the ECU has to pull power in first gear whereas there’s no such issue with the same engine and transmission in the Accord.
I think if Acura can work some of the NSX's magic into the next generation of Type-S's, they'll have a home run. Sport Hybrid with the existing 3.0T driving the front wheels and hybrid motor(s) driving the rear wheels. Or perhaps make this the Type-S+ variant. Depending on output, it could actually compete with the current top tier performance cars in the segment like the M's, AMGs and RS's of the world ... tho rumors have it that AMG and RS hybrid powerplants are going to be eclipsing 600+HP in their next iterations (and I'm sure BMW will follow suit), so then it would be back to typical Acura playing fiddle being late to the game.
The NSX's ICE powerplant made significantly more power than the current 3.0T (520HP v 355HP), so if they kept similar output of everything, you'd be looking in the 450-500HP range total if they added hybridization. Though, with the advancement of electric motors, and if Honda/Acura are brave enough to spin some more power out of the 3.0T, they could definitely be competing with Deutschland. And lest we forget, the Koreans aren't going to be resting on their laurels either. They're already ahead of the Japanese on their EV fleet.
The following users liked this post:
MarcoTLX (06-17-2022)
#319
Adept Acura Enthusiast
I think that may need to redo your math. If you're paying an extra $22 per week, that comes out to $1144 per year. Even at $7 per gallon, that comes out to 163 gallons. If you're using that much more gas at 29mpg than 33mpg, you would need to be driving 39K miles per year (X/29 - X/33)*7 = 22*52, solve for X, X = 39,100.
![Not Funny](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/smilies/notfunny.gif)
but forreal this makes sense and I doubt he’d be driving nearly 40k miles a year unless your commute to work is far and you work 5-6 days a week plus using it for other daily driver tasks.
#320
I think that may need to redo your math. If you're paying an extra $22 per week, that comes out to $1144 per year. Even at $7 per gallon, that comes out to 163 gallons. If you're using that much more gas at 29mpg than 33mpg, you would need to be driving 39K miles per year (X/29 - X/33)*7 = 22*52, solve for X, X = 39,100.