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.
It looked like the car was very planted and "peppy". Also, anyone else catch how solid that door sounded when it shut? Music to my ears right there.
I'm disappointed with the 0-60 time but I mean it looked like it picks up very quick from 0-45 which is really what matters in stop and go traffic (I counted around 4-4.5 seconds, not bad I guess). The acceleration dies down past the torque power band of course. Loving that sculpted hood as you can even see it from the inside.
Last edited by Jiten Patel; 09-23-2020 at 11:27 AM.
Reason: Incorrect 0-45 time
Man you guys are so quick to jump to baseless conclusions about this vehicle. Just be patient. The full reviews will be around very soon. I still believe the performance would be around the numbers of the a5/s5 which it was tested against. Regardless, the car looks amazing and can’t wait to own one. I could care less about rear leg roam as I don’t have any kids. If I did have kids I would not even be entertaining a sedan especially of this class.
Man you guys are so quick to jump to baseless conclusions about this vehicle. Just be patient. The full reviews will be around very soon. I still believe the performance would be around the numbers of the a5/s5 which it was tested against. Regardless, the car looks amazing and can’t wait to own one. I could care less about rear leg roam as I don’t have any kids. If I did have kids I would not even be entertaining a sedan especially of this class.
Talk about baseless expectations ... One "review" is already out, you just don't like the real world values so far. The RDX data wasn't a red herring.
^I see the A4, not the A5. And the A4 does it in 5.2s, no way in hell the G2 TLX will match it. And it's for sure not 7 inches more practical than my A4.
^I see the A4, not the A5. And the A4 does it in 5.2s, no way in hell the G2 TLX will match it. And it's for sure not 7 inches more practical than my A4.
I was about to say the A4 is 5.2 seconds lol
then again with the A4 it’s small inside with barely any storage and no sunglass holder which annoys me. Not really a fan of the touch only also
i will be looking at the A4 though when choosing between though
Yes, Type S looks amazing but if it's slow and can't break into 4's this is a huge disappointment. No way, I'm forking out almost $60K to have the SLOWEST car in the segment.
Also, if the 4 banger can't even match 1G TLX this is a huge L especially when this is expected to be the volume leader of a PERFORMANCE brand LMAO . Looks like 1G TLX in Aspec and huge discounts is the real winner here.....
then again with the A4 it’s small inside with barely any storage and no sunglass holder which annoys me. Not really a fan of the touch only also
The way the truck opens and seats fold/opening makes it very practical (rectangular versus round-ish on TLX). I had no problems bringing tables from Ikea which do not fit in a Ford Escape due to length.
The way the truck opens and seats fold make it very practical (rectangular versus round-ish on TLX). I had no problems bringing tables from Ikea which do not fit in a Ford Escape.
In regard to the audi, I wish they kept the mmi dial.
The real question is will Acura finally have the trunk open all the way by itself ( I know Spec does but I’m curious if tech does )
It looked like the car was very planted and "peppy". Also, anyone else catch how solid that door sounded when it shut? Music to my ears right there.
I'm disappointed with the 0-60 time but I mean it looked like it picks up very quick from 0-45 which is really what matters in stop and go traffic (I counted around 4-4.5 seconds, not bad I guess). The acceleration dies down past the torque power band of course. Loving that sculpted hood as you can even see it from the inside.
While doing my 0-60 times in my 3G RDX, the most time it loses to any of its competitors is 0-15MPH or thereabouts, then it really starts kicking and gets rolling. It's all too apparent that throttle and power is heavily mitigated to protect the drivetrain from hard launches. This is actually horrible for stop and go traffic as there's a noticeable delay when you hit the gas pedal and want quick acceleration, but it nearly bogs and goes like a Honda Fit for the first second or so. If Honda didn't put this in place, it would likely be running low to mid 5s 0-60 times. But, this is an admitted failure on their part by knowingly having a weak drivetrain and their work-around being pulling power rather than making components more robust. It was also a way for them to eek out gas mileage to give the perceived notion that they're both performance oriented and fuel efficient. My 3G RDX is averaging 20.9 MPG. My 600rwHP GTO supercharged V8 averages 19.5 MPG.
As others have suggested, the more I talk about it, the more I think I will heed their advice and just make the jump to the Germans to see for myself if the rumors of unreliability are actually true or not. Obviously, the Japanese have thrown in the towel with actually bringing a competitive vehicle to market for those who actually want performance.
Upping my estimate to be $54-56K to start. I wonder if the people at Acura simply want this thing to fail, or are so disconnected from reality that they actually think it will do well. Maybe this is their way to simply turn around and say, "well, the TLX sales were a complete travesty, so that's why we no longer offer sedans" in 5yrs time. I doubt a new ILX isn't coming, despite that so called plan that was laid out a few months back showing a possible Type S compact sedan ... they'll probably release an Acura version of the HR-V.
While doing my 0-60 times in my 3G RDX, the most time it loses to any of its competitors is 0-15MPH or thereabouts, then it really starts kicking and gets rolling. It's all too apparent that throttle and power is heavily mitigated to protect the drivetrain from hard launches. This is actually horrible for stop and go traffic as there's a noticeable delay before you hit the gas pedal and want quick acceleration, but it nearly bogs and goes like a Honda Fit for the first second or or so. If Honda didn't put this in place, it would likely be running low to mid 5s 0-60 times. But, this is an admitted failure on their part by knowingly having a weak drivetrain and their work-around being pulling power rather than making components more robust. It was also a way for them to eek out gas mileage to give the perceived notion that they're both performance oriented and fuel efficient. My 3G RDX is averaging 20.9 MPG. My 600rwHP GTO supercharged V8 averages 19.5 MPG.
As others have suggested, the more I talk about it, the more I think I will heed their advice and just make the jump to the Germans to see for myself if the rumors of unreliability are actually true or not. Obviously, the Japanese have thrown in the towel with actually bringing a competitive vehicle to market for those who actually want performance.
THIS - The 3G RDX is exactly why I got the 1G TLX vs waiting for the 2G. Well that plus current 1G incentives. Plus I have no desire for an all-around larger vehicle if it's just for show and offers no practical benefits.
How long have you had your RDX? I have a SHAWD Advance with 20,000 miles on it. I’m in year three of ownership. While early in, the hesitation you noted existed that is no longer the case. I’ve seen a lot of reviews for the RDX and while no one has ever said it is fast no one has said it was slow. Definitely feels fast enough for the way I use the vehicle. I’m averaging around 18 mpg in Sport with mostly city driving which is about what I was getting with my TLX V6.
How long have you had your RDX? I have a SHAWD Advance with 20,000 miles on it. I’m in year three of ownership. While early in, the hesitation you noted existed that is no longer the case. I’ve seen a lot of reviews for the RDX and while no one has ever said it is fast no one has said it was slow. Definitely feels fast enough for the way I use the vehicle. I’m averaging around 18 mpg in Sport with mostly city driving which is about what I was getting with my TLX V6.
About 14 months now, bought in late July 2019, 2020 A-Spec SH-AWD with about 11k miles on the clock. I did probably 15+ runs while brake boosting (no point, doesn't build boost) and just romping on the gas off the brake from a stop. All in Sport+ mode. It's not a delay in throttle response, like I saw a lot of complaints of, but you can absolutely feel that power is being pulled back on launch with heavy inputs from your right foot.
Upping my estimate to be $54-56K to start. I wonder if the people at Acura simply want this thing to fail, or are so disconnected from reality that they actually think it will do well. Maybe this is their way to simply turn around and say, "well, the TLX sales were a complete travesty, so that's why we no longer offer sedans" in 5yrs time. I doubt a new ILX isn't coming, despite that so called plan that was laid out a few months back showing a possible Type S compact sedan ... they'll probably release an Acura version of the HR-V.
I make no claims to understand Acura's marketing or pricing strategy - but keep in mind over time car buyers expect discounts - so it's not unreasonable to start pricing at a higher point.
You get the early adopters at full buck and a year or so later you start knocking 4 or 5 thousand off the price to move them off the lots.
While doing my 0-60 times in my 3G RDX, the most time it loses to any of its competitors is 0-15MPH or thereabouts, then it really starts kicking and gets rolling. It's all too apparent that throttle and power is heavily mitigated to protect the drivetrain from hard launches. This is actually horrible for stop and go traffic as there's a noticeable delay when you hit the gas pedal and want quick acceleration, but it nearly bogs and goes like a Honda Fit for the first second or so. If Honda didn't put this in place, it would likely be running low to mid 5s 0-60 times. But, this is an admitted failure on their part by knowingly having a weak drivetrain and their work-around being pulling power rather than making components more robust. It was also a way for them to eek out gas mileage to give the perceived notion that they're both performance oriented and fuel efficient. My 3G RDX is averaging 20.9 MPG. My 600rwHP GTO supercharged V8 averages 19.5 MPG.
As others have suggested, the more I talk about it, the more I think I will heed their advice and just make the jump to the Germans to see for myself if the rumors of unreliability are actually true or not. Obviously, the Japanese have thrown in the towel with actually bringing a competitive vehicle to market for those who actually want performance.
It looked like the car was very planted and "peppy". Also, anyone else catch how solid that door sounded when it shut? Music to my ears right there.
I'm disappointed with the 0-60 time but I mean it looked like it picks up very quick from 0-45 which is really what matters in stop and go traffic (I counted around 4-4.5 seconds, not bad I guess). The acceleration dies down past the torque power band of course. Loving that sculpted hood as you can even see it from the inside.
I applaud your tenacity at trying to find anything worth celebrating about this car, but if your new goalpost is the 0-45 number, you’re going to be disappointed. If this powertrain is tuned to be similar to the RDX (and all signs so far point to yes), then the 0-45 number is going to be even worse comparatively speaking.
If I recall correctly, you predicted that this car would accelerate as quickly or quicker than the Accord 2.0T, despite it having the same powertrain and weighing 600lb more. I implore you to do some more research and learn more about these cars and the competition before making more baseless and wishful predictions. Otherwise you’re just going to look like a blind fanatic with little to no credibility
I said "...for people still interested in sedans" because not everyone wants an SUV. For those sticking with the sedan segment what they want hasn't changed just like those who want a sports car it won't change that they want it to be fast, those that want an SUV they want it to be roomy... Segments dictate some very basic things that are consistent so it's an odd move to deviate from this formula for no benefit; "the illusion of RWD" is a really bizarre angle.
Interesting.
Do you think most people (not car guys or people who frequent internet car forums) set out to buy something in a defined segment - or do they let their needs dictate the segment they purchase from?
In regard to the audi, I wish they kept the mmi dial.
The 2020 Audi Q5-e PHEV still has the dial. It's smaller now and the graffiti touchpad is separate now. We will have to wait to see about the 2021 Q5.
The A4/S4 and other 4/5 are doing full-touch-screen.
They are doing something else in A6 and others.
They have so many different vehicles ... they can try various approaches in each
Man you guys are so quick to jump to baseless conclusions about this vehicle. Just be patient. The full reviews will be around very soon. I still believe the performance would be around the numbers of the a5/s5 which it was tested against. Regardless, the car looks amazing and can’t wait to own one. I could care less about rear leg roam as I don’t have any kids. If I did have kids I would not even be entertaining a sedan especially of this class.
Keep sticking your head in the sand. These conclusions, while not gospel, are not just wild guesses devoid of data and information. We know how much this car weighs. We know how much power this car puts down. We know how this engine/transmission combination performers in two other cars. We know the limitations of this drivetrain in another application. And we now have video evidence of how it appears to perform in the real world. Tell me again how this leads to baseless conclusions? If anything, all of this makes for more compelling evidence than your “it’s going to perform like the a5/s5 because that’s what it was tested against” argument (ignoring for a second that you are also flat out wrong as the Type S was benchmarked against the S4, and we have no evidence that Acura tested the 2.0T against the A4 or A5).
Do you think most people (not car guys or people who frequent internet car forums) set out to buy something in a defined segment - or do they let their needs dictate the segment they purchase from?
Using family, friends and past customers that fit this criteria as a baseline so a large sample group, people pick the segment that they want first and then find what suits their needs within that segment; you will not convince someone dead set on buying an SUV to look at sedans and you will not convince a sedan person to buy an SUV. This is why I am so baffled by Acura's strategy. Think about it this way:
I like to sit higher, I need cargo space.
I don't like the driving dynamics of something that sits higher, I need something that can fit in my garage and/or I regularly park on the street in a tighter space.
These two basic but critical needs have determined what segment you will be looking at and then you will find what you want from there.
I make no claims to understand Acura's marketing or pricing strategy - but keep in mind over time car buyers expect discounts - so it's not unreasonable to start pricing at a higher point.
You get the early adopters at full buck and a year or so later you start knocking 4 or 5 thousand off the price to move them off the lots.
True. Only way I would still consider it would be ~$50k OTD, which would like be around an 18% discount. Doubt that's ever happening, no matter how abysmal the sales.
Originally Posted by Legend2TL
Yeah, so true
NSX is amazing. But, you can't judge a brand based off one car. By that metric, Toyota is the pinnacle of the performance car world as they're soon to release their GR Super Sport hypercar that's supposedly going to wipe the floor with its light weight and insane power. And we all know how boring Toyota/Lexus is ... in fact, it seems its only getting worse with the demise of their V8 and no plans to put anything spirited in any of their cars. Supra is great, but just a reskinned Z4.
What has Acura really done since the release of the NSX? Released a TLX that likely won't even break into the 13's in a quarter mile for over $40k while touting themselves as a "performance brand."
Using family, friends and past customers that fit this criteria as a baseline so a large sample group, people pick the segment that they want first and then find what suits their needs within that segment; you will not convince someone dead set on buying an SUV to look at sedans and you will not convince a sedan person to buy an SUV. This is why I am so baffled by Acura's strategy. Think about it this way:
I like to sit higher, I need cargo space.
I don't like the driving dynamics of something that sits higher, I need something that can fit in my garage and/or I regularly park on the street in a tighter space.
These two basic but critical needs have determined what segment you will be looking at and then you will find what you want from there.
I think we may be saying the same thing here. I have a buddy who has two large dogs. He takes them to the dog park on a regular basis. He's a muscle car guy from way back but he drives around in a big Jeep today because it fits his needs. His needs defined his segment. My son drives a Chrylser minivan. I can 100% guarantee he would rather be driving ANYTHING other than the minivan but he has 4 sons and that's the thing that works best for them.
I think Acura realizes that most (again - we're not talking car guys or someone set on getting a sports car) people with families want an SUV. Certainly Acura looks at the people who buy the RDX and MDX and CR-V and fully understand who those people are. The TLX isn't a car at the top of the list if you have a family and need the space. I doubt that was the case for the 1G either.
I'm not making the case for designing cars with limited rear seat room - but rather making the point that it's likely not a serious failing for the TLX for the vast majority who have it on their short list.
That hood is massive! And yeah unfortunately sounds like a lot of road noise so typical Acura.
Pause at 10:33, the backseat (and rear doors) look pretty small.
I sat in one today, the legroom is pretty good, but the headroom is fairly low in the backseat. I am only 5'10-11" and my head almost touches the headliner, it feels much more cramped than my 2018 Accord. I am still trading my Accord in though as the front seats are way more comfortable than the Accord.
I sat in one today, the legroom is pretty good, but the headroom is fairly low in the backseat. I am only 5'10-11" and my head almost touches the headliner, it feels much more cramped than my 2018 Accord. I am still trading my Accord in though as the front seats are way more comfortable than the Accord.
They didn't let you drive it? Which trim level are you looking at?
I never understand the point of these type of discussions. Why is it important that one brand sold 6,000 vehicles more than another over the last 5 years. If your 5 year bonus depended on it I could see the significance. Absent that it’s just silly.
I suppose when people don't have any real data to back up their claims, they look for anything that has numbers to try and spin to prove their point, even if it's irrelevant and/or flawed.
Upping my estimate to be $54-56K to start. I wonder if the people at Acura simply want this thing to fail, or are so disconnected from reality that they actually think it will do well. Maybe this is their way to simply turn around and say, "well, the TLX sales were a complete travesty, so that's why we no longer offer sedans" in 5yrs time. I doubt a new ILX isn't coming, despite that so called plan that was laid out a few months back showing a possible Type S compact sedan ... they'll probably release an Acura version of the HR-V.
They are really looking at a same starting price as an M340i RWD? LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
They are really looking at a same starting price as an M340i RWD? LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I think all that says is that they’ve not quite settled on a price. Perhaps they’re considering adding in the absent features some folks are complaining about.
I applaud your tenacity at trying to find anything worth celebrating about this car, but if your new goalpost is the 0-45 number, you’re going to be disappointed. If this powertrain is tuned to be similar to the RDX (and all signs so far point to yes), then the 0-45 number is going to be even worse comparatively speaking.
If I recall correctly, you predicted that this car would accelerate as quickly or quicker than the Accord 2.0T, despite it having the same powertrain and weighing 600lb more. I implore you to do some more research and learn more about these cars and the competition before making more baseless and wishful predictions. Otherwise you’re just going to look like a blind fanatic with little to no credibility
Thank you.
You recall incorrectly, I did not say this car was going to be quicker than the Accord so I suggest that you do some more research before you start picking on someone and start forming your own baseless predictions on how a person is. Mind you, we didn't have all the numbers back then and now we do. Acura had pulled the weight numbers by the way so those weren't even confirmed. I already said I'm disappointed in my previous post. The 0-45 time I counted? Yeah I'm disappointed with that too. The "I guess" should've given that out. But hey, looks like I have to really be clear here before you start thinking I'm some blind fanatic with little to no credibility. I don't need to tell you what I do, which cars I'm looking into, what I studied, who I am, which forums I'm in, which cars I've driven, or which Car make I am a fan of to prove to you that I'm not some blind fanatic. I don't need credit from anyone here. I'm open to people's opinions and open to being corrected but not when people are coming at me claiming they know me and then proceed to give me advice lol. Keep that negativity away from me please.
Oh yes I agree that it's not going to beat an Accord, but comparing it to a minivan is absurd. I'm sure it'll still be like 5.9s or 6.0s. I would not be surprised that it is 6.1s. The current TLX does 0-60 in approx 6.2s. But lets just wait for the real numbers.
Back to the 2021 TLX... I've explained this once before, HP and Torque numbers don't mean anything. Acura comparing the HP and Torque numbers seems to just be a marketing ploy as the weights/sizes of the other competitors differ greatly. The weight, aerodynamics, transmission tuning, etc.. all play a part. But based on the recorded 0-60 time, it seems like the tuning will essentially be the same as you said fiatlux. The TLX and RDX are essentially the same in terms of it's powertrain. Handling is where the TLX will shine due to the DWB, sedan body structure, and possibly weight balance (we will know more once it goes on sale).
The acceleration at the 6:07 mark was painful. It also looked like he was accelerating while the roadway slops downward or am I wrong? The 2.0T could use a reliable re-flash tune to make it a bit quicker and more responsive. Let's see what the Type-s will do.
i will be looking at the A4 though when choosing between though
I suggest you initially review all Audi 4's and all 5's (including S and Q) . Prestige trim on all (as Premium Pro is only $5k cheaper) .
Then go test drive the short-list.
I think they will also bring you one if you ask nicely.
Thank you.
You recall incorrectly, I did not say this car was going to be quicker than the Accord so I suggest that you do some more research before you start picking on someone and start forming your own baseless predictions on how a person is.
Jon Ikeda, the Acura VP already confirmed that the 2021 TLX will be faster than the RDX despite it having a similar drivetrain so I wouldn't assume it's going to have the same time as an RDX. It will be tuned as a sports sedan. Remember this 2.0 turbo is capable of generating over 300 HP. Expect it to be closer to the Accord, if not faster.
The 6.5 seconds is the same as C&D estimated like a week ago. Did he test 0-60 in the video? (No he didn’t.)
The RDX AWD 2.0t is also right around 6.5 seconds to 60 and it weighs 4000 lbs. I might be wrong but I don’t believe we’ve seen a curb weight for the new TLX. The reason to believe the TLX would be faster than the RDX comes down to potentially less weight (current TLX AWD is 3800 lbs) and the engine having a different code designation so maybe they’ve improved something from the RDX that would allow it to be quicker
But I also expect for them to limit the torque in the low gears to save the SHAWD system like they do in the RDX so it might just be down to weight. I suppose another possibility is changing the tranny programming and gaining .1-.2 seconds that way.
09-23-2020, 11:19 AM
