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.
I would not be surprised if the new TLX continues to use the same 2014-era hardware (TI Jacinto 6 SoC if anyone is wondering what it is).
Do you have (or know where I can find) more info on the Acura head-units? Seems like there would be a name for the old 2-screen system (that runs on the TI Jacinto 6 SoC platform). IIRC, it got revised a bit around 2017.
The new single-screen/touch-pad system appears to be a new architecture.
Do you have (or know where I can find) more info on the Acura head-units? Seems like there would be a name for the old 2-screen system (that runs on the TI Jacinto 6 SoC platform). IIRC, it got revised a bit around 2017.
The new single-screen/touch-pad system appears to be a new architecture.
The Jacinto 6 is actually what powers the new headunit from the RDX. I'm not sure what the older dual-screen ones use, but I imagine it's substantially older.
I think I've been one of the harshest critics here about the car, but the more I think about it the more my stance softens.
First, I think there's two reasons why this car (on paper) is under-powered compared to the competition, and there might be a silver lining to this.
1) This is a low-volume engine that's only going to be used in the TLX, MDX, and if we're lucky the RDX. That means Acura can't amortize the development costs across a large number of units, so the amount of resources they could afford to spend on the engine is relatively limited. Compare that to the competition: the B58 engine in the M340i engine is also used (in some variation) in the Z4, X3, X4, Supra, X5, X7, 5-series, 6-series, 7-series, and 8-series. It is a very very high volume engine given it's the base engine in many of those models. For Audi, the EA839 in some form is also used in the S5, SQ5, A6, A7, A8, Allroad, Q8, hell even the Cayenne and Panamera. And the M276 in the Mercedes? Also used in the GLC, GLE, E-Class, and S-Class. So it makes sense that the Germans are able to invest a lot more money into their engines because they're going to get a heck of a lot more use out of it.
2) Acura needed to spread their resources that are allocated to "performance characteristics" across a much broader range of capabilities in order to make this car a well-rounded track-capable performer. BMW, Mercedes, and Audi have the M3, C63, and RS4 to serve as their track torchbearers, so for the M340i, C43, and S4, they can focus more on what regular customers care about, which is power and straight-line acceleration. However, Acura doesn't have another car at the top of the model to serve as its performance paragon, so the Type-S needs to pull double-duty as both the sensible (yet powerful) daily-driveable car, as well as the all-around track performer. Honda/Acura has always taken a more well-rounded approach to performance, and this is another example of that. They've played the game of "our performance car isn't as powerful as yours, and isn't as fast in a straight line, but it's faster at the track" seemingly for their entire existence.
Point 1 sucks, but it is what it is. Acura is a relatively small operation, and there's only so much they can do; so be it. Like it or not, they will always be David to the German Goliaths.
Point 2, however, makes me think that the Type-S is going to be a better enthusiasts/drivers car and outperform the C43 and S4 on the track, and maybe even the M340i. None of those cars (the first two especially) were built with the track in mind, whereas the Type-S very well could be the more dynamic and engaging car, even if it's slower in a straight line. For enthusiasts, this could be the car to beat.
That being said, I still think it's going to be lag behind the others in the sales department, because what customers in this segment are looking for is daily-usable performance. Power is much more accessible, tangible, and relevant for most drivers compared to things like handling, steering feel, balance, braking, etc. For every enthusiast Eddie that's in the target customer segment, there's 10 commuter Charlies and normal Nancys who likely won't be able to appreciate the car for what it is, but can appreciate point-and-shoot power.
I'm wondering if Honda will eventually bring the 3.0T into the Honda lineup, at least on the Pilot/Passport/Ridgeline and maybe the Odyssey (I personally think the 2.0T with hybrid tech would be better suited for the minivan). I can't remember, but did Acura ever mention this engine will be exclusive to them? As you say, Honda/Acura is a small fry compared to much larger manufacturers so you would think they would try to use this engine on as much as their line up as possible to recover the R&D costs. I suppose Honda could detune the engine to around 300 HP/300 lb-ft that runs on regular gas with a few minor modifications and say this engine is exclusive to Honda, with Acura getting the high performance variant.
I'm wondering if Honda will eventually bring the 3.0T into the Honda lineup, at least on the Pilot/Passport/Ridgeline and maybe the Odyssey (I personally think the 2.0T with hybrid tech would be better suited for the minivan). I can't remember, but did Acura ever mention this engine will be exclusive to them? As you say, Honda/Acura is a small fry compared to much larger manufacturers so you would think they would try to use this engine on as much as their line up as possible to recover the R&D costs. I suppose Honda could detune the engine to around 300 HP/300 lb-ft that runs on regular gas with a few minor modifications and say this engine is exclusive to Honda, with Acura getting the high performance variant.
In a lot of the marketing materials, Acura has made it a point to mention that this is an Acura-exclusive engine, so I wouldn't hold my breath on seeing it in Hondas anytime soon (or ever).
In a lot of the marketing materials, Acura has made it a point to mention that this is an Acura-exclusive engine, so I wouldn't hold my breath on seeing it in Hondas anytime soon (or ever).
If that's the case, I'm wondering what the next generation Pilot would use. Continue on marching with old faithful J35 or move to the 2.0T, with some form of electric assist perhaps?
If that's the case, I'm wondering what the next generation Pilot would use. Continue on marching with old faithful J35 or move to the 2.0T, with some form of electric assist perhaps?
Maybe not even with an electric assist. The Ascent 2.4T is good for 260hp, the Atlas is a 2.0T with 235hp or VR6 with 276hp, Telluride and Palisade is a V6 making 291, and the Highlander is a V6 making 295. I think 272hp from the 2.0T is enough to be class competitive. I would not be surprised if more mainstream automakers start downsizing their engines as well. Highlander might be next, considering that Toyota is already downsizing its platform mate Sienna to a hybrid that makes 243hp as the only option.
1. Waze or even Google maps is far superior to the Acura Navigation. Not even close. Can't remember the last time I bothered with the Acura Navigation. Waze at least has police alerts and traffic so useful even when you know where you're going.
2. You can't even set the Nav on the acura unless your stopped.
3. So then try using the voice comands to get an address in on Acura's system while driving. It's near impossible. .
1. I have used Waze, but not thru CarPlay. Now that I have the Audi-Q5e I guess I can try it. But again, the Audi's NAV seems perfectly fine to me.
2. Yeah. It's still like that huh? We started using the App, and uploading the address from there. Our 2014-MDX had no AA/CarPlay/Siri-Eyes-Free ... no, none of that.
3. I never had much of a problem with Acura's voice recognition, but my wife tended to get into frustrating arguments with it. Needless to say, I put common things on Favorites/Shortcuts for her and all was good again. The problem seemed to be a lack of processing-power. Anyway, I heard it was better on the new Acura screen/touchpad system (here's hoping).
For me, it was an instant turn off. I came back around, but only to see if a) the numbers are underrated and b) how well the car does with a tune, as far as power increase as well as durability of the drivetrain. If people are able to get the Type S to around 500 crank reliably, as BMW has done with their factory S58, I'll be game. The ~500lbs weight savings on the Type S over the M5 would probably make them feel about the same until you got to "get pulled over at gunpoint" speeds.
I hope you're right, but I suspect you won't be. Consumers' buying patterns have vastly changed since 2007, and people are more than willing to finance themselves into irreversible debt to flaunt their clout on social media.
Again, different strokes. I have an older vehicle that can connect to my phone via USB, but doesn't have Apple Carplay. It doesn't show the Waze map, but I only need the step by step directions over the speakers anyway, as I'm looking at the road for the sign/street to begin with. I remember the days of printing out a map from MapQuest and driving down the entire east coast as a teenager for spring break, I can manage without needing my hand held to know where to go. Tho seeing how people drive, it's no wonder this is a "must have" option. Music plays over Spotify and I can skip songs from the head unit. Only thing I can't do is change streams if I wanted to, but you can simply do it on the phone. Not anymore dangerous doing it on the phone than staring at the infotainment screen which doesn't react as quickly as the phone. But, I've begun to start enjoying driving without music ... drive around in dead silence to match my soul. LoL.
I guess if you don't have it then you don't know what you're missing. It's pretty nice when you'rer taking a long road trip and have waze up on the large screen along with a high end radar detector. Then again I tend to travel slightly (cough cough) above the PSL so maybe not so valuable for some.
1. I have used Waze, but not thru CarPlay. Now that I have the Audi-Q5e I guess I can try it. But again, the Audi's NAV seems perfectly fine to me.
2. Yeah. It's still like that huh? We started using the App, and uploading the address from there. Our 2014-MDX had no AA/CarPlay/Siri-Eyes-Free ... no, none of that.
3. I never had much of a problem with Acura's voice recognition, but my wife tended to get into frustrating arguments with it. Needless to say, I put common things on Favorites/Shortcuts for her and all was good again. The problem seemed to be a lack of processing-power. Anyway, I heard it was better on the new Acura screen/touchpad system (here's hoping).
Think all the quality Navigational system can get you where you want to go make restaurant reservations etc. Mine is updated over the air for fresh maps on a regular bases. Good for it and all the other builtin packages.
What Waze has that thumps them is real time reporting from a lot of users. Junk in the road you will get a warning. You can say thanks to let the system know its still there or say its gone. Speed traps are ID'd so you can move faster without getting stopped. Things that manufactures lawyers will not let them do.
200+ mile run to check the beach house after they let people back onto the island early this week. Door to door including city traffic.
Car play spreads the Waze map across the main screen in the car. Can still run the factory map on the HUD at the same time for easy directions
Last edited by BEAR-AvHistory; 08-15-2020 at 02:42 PM.
Not me. I was hoping for a modest bump over my last tl (305hp) and my current caddy ats (321hp). My only disappointment is the trim level as my preference is the advance model w a v6, just like my last tl.
Does anyone know if the v6 will be offered in other packages and not just the Type-S?
Thanks. Kind of figured. But a guy can hope right? Just wish they'd offer the Type-S with more than just black or red interior. Never will understand why manufacturers limit the interior colors of their sport models. A nice tan would be welcomed...
Thanks. Kind of figured. But a guy can hope right? Just wish they'd offer the Type-S with more than just black or red interior. Never will understand why manufacturers limit the interior colors of their sport models. A nice tan would be welcomed...
I'm guessing they figure that folks who buy the Type-S will want something a bit more aggressive, shouty, and flamboyant. The amount of enthusiasts who prefer something subtle and subdued is relatively small compared to the ones who wants the whole world to know how great/fancy their car is.
I'm guessing they figure that folks who buy the Type-S will want something a bit more aggressive, shouty, and flamboyant. The amount of enthusiasts who prefer something subtle and subdued is relatively small compared to the ones who wants the whole world to know how great/fancy their car is.
I think you are wrong there. The world doesn't know what's under the hood. The differences exterior wise since they already offer the appearance package will not be all that apparent to most people. Outside of different wheels, quad exhaust and some badging there most likely won't be much different to see. The last type S appearance wise just had the waffle rims, quad exhuast and side skirts (which any model TLX has now if you want it). The tail lights were slightly different color setup and the marker lights a different color when on than the non-Type S but so subtle that other than owners of the car nobody else would know.
I don't get why most here seem so focused on the horsepower and torque numbers. That's not necessarily what makes a car fun to drive or even sell well. Ultimately it is the road tests and comparisons that will make or break the car. Look at Mazda cars - any of them - all of them. Consistently underpowered among their competitors yet delivering a driving experience that is more satisfying, and consistently getting raves from automotive journalists. Big power numbers are good for nothing but paper. It is where the rubber meets the road that matters. And I am not talking about 0-60 numbers. That too is meaningless in regular or even spirited driving (do you use launch mode or rev and dump your clutch in every day driving?). It is things like nimbleness/agility, steering feel and response, passing power, etc. that will make the difference. I hope Acura delivers on those.
I don't get why most here seem so focused on the horsepower and torque numbers. That's not necessarily what makes a car fun to drive or even sell well. Ultimately it is the road tests and comparisons that will make or break the car. Look at Mazda cars - any of them - all of them. Consistently underpowered among their competitors yet delivering a driving experience that is more satisfying, and consistently getting raves from automotive journalists. Big power numbers are good for nothing but paper. It is where the rubber meets the road that matters. And I am not talking about 0-60 numbers. That too is meaningless in regular or even spirited driving (do you use launch mode or rev and dump your clutch in every day driving?). It is things like nimbleness/agility, steering feel and response, passing power, etc. that will make the difference. I hope Acura delivers on those.
It has plenty of power for me. The Accord Sport 2.0 is nice. Love the power it has. If I wanted pure power for it's class, I would have gone with the Fusion Sport with over 300hp and AWD. But I want overall daily driving too. And reliability. Everyone is all complaining about the power numbers. Ugh! Like you said. Power numbers are bragging rights. The Type R beat plenty of cars with more power around Nuremberg. I want to see how driving that much power in a V6 turbo made by Acura with their famous SH-AWD system feels. How the features work. How it looks sitting in my yard when I come out to look at it going to work and when I'm walking into the house. I doubt any of us are going to use the full 355hp it has EVERY day. So people need to stop being so focused on the power numbers.
I don't get why most here seem so focused on the horsepower and torque numbers. That's not necessarily what makes a car fun to drive or even sell well. Ultimately it is the road tests and comparisons that will make or break the car. Look at Mazda cars - any of them - all of them. Consistently underpowered among their competitors yet delivering a driving experience that is more satisfying, and consistently getting raves from automotive journalists. Big power numbers are good for nothing but paper. It is where the rubber meets the road that matters. And I am not talking about 0-60 numbers. That too is meaningless in regular or even spirited driving (do you use launch mode or rev and dump your clutch in every day driving?). It is things like nimbleness/agility, steering feel and response, passing power, etc. that will make the difference. I hope Acura delivers on those.
I believe this is human nature in justifying their actions. When one spends $45-50k for a vehicle, they want to select the best vehicle from the group, and they want to justifying why spend $50k (and not $30k) for their choice.
Naturally, it falls on the hp and the torque numbers to compare between various vehicles, and justification criteria for their expensive choice.
Therefore, even though they don't use all, say 400hp, every day, top hp is a number that some buyers are going after and are proud to have, or it is like getting their money's worth.
Last edited by Edward'TLS; 08-16-2020 at 05:53 PM.
I doubt any of us are going to use the full 355hp it has EVERY day. So people need to stop being so focused on the power numbers.
I'm pretty sure most people will get full use of the power more frequently than they get use of the SH-AWD system, the fade-resistant Brembo brakes, and the extra grip from the summer tires, so I suppose it would be fine if the Type-S came in FWD with regular brakes and all-season tires.
Not from Honda/Acura, because Honda/Acura are known to put out nothing but good handling vehicles. Especially more so for the Type-S versions.
355hp is too much hp for a FWD sport sedan that can still handle well in corners, unlike RWD vehicles that can virtually take unlimited amount of hp while the front end dedicated for steering purpose only.
This is exactly why Acura had no choice but to pair all its FWD-chassis vehicles, that has more than ~290hp, with AWD systems . Audi is in the same boat as Acura, being having only FWD chassis vehicle platforms.
Sure, power is not everything. But the cars that have been mentioned as competitors are very good cars AND have more power.
I'm a speed freak and am on a lot of performance car and motorcycle forums. Every so often I see a post where someone says "I'd rather drive a slow car/motorcycle fast than a fast one slow. To which I reply, I'd rather drive a fast one fast.
I don't get why most here seem so focused on the horsepower and torque numbers. That's not necessarily what makes a car fun to drive or even sell well. Ultimately it is the road tests and comparisons that will make or break the car. Look at Mazda cars - any of them - all of them. Consistently underpowered among their competitors yet delivering a driving experience that is more satisfying, and consistently getting raves from automotive journalists. Big power numbers are good for nothing but paper. It is where the rubber meets the road that matters. And I am not talking about 0-60 numbers. That too is meaningless in regular or even spirited driving (do you use launch mode or rev and dump your clutch in every day driving?). It is things like nimbleness/agility, steering feel and response, passing power, etc. that will make the difference. I hope Acura delivers on those.
And which cars sell the best, Mazda or the other vehicles being compared? Mazda finally caved and started putting turbos on them as an option. BTW, I have owned seven Mazdas, seven Honda/Acuras, and seven Nissan/Infintis. I've owned a heck of a lot of other brands also.
It has plenty of power for me. The Accord Sport 2.0 is nice. Love the power it has. If I wanted pure power for it's class, I would have gone with the Fusion Sport with over 300hp and AWD. But I want overall daily driving too. And reliability. Everyone is all complaining about the power numbers. Ugh! Like you said. Power numbers are bragging rights. The Type R beat plenty of cars with more power around Nuremberg. I want to see how driving that much power in a V6 turbo made by Acura with their famous SH-AWD system feels. How the features work. How it looks sitting in my yard when I come out to look at it going to work and when I'm walking into the house. I doubt any of us are going to use the full 355hp it has EVERY day. So people need to stop being so focused on the power numbers.
The 2G TLX looks noticeably bigger than the 1G, some are saying it’s approximately the same size as the 4G TL, which means it will very likely weigh more than the outgoing model. I’m thinking the 355hp will only give it a slight advantage over the 290hp in the smaller, lighter-weight 1G TLX. If my hypothesis is correct, they really shouldn’t even bother calling this the Type S, because this engine output only allows it to compensate for the weight difference. It’s going to be pretty funny when the road tests come back with virtually identical 0-60 and 1/4-mile times as the outgoing V6 model.
The 2G TLX looks noticeably bigger than the 1G, some are saying it’s approximately the same size as the 4G TL, which means it will very likely weigh more than the outgoing model. I’m thinking the 355hp will only give it a slight advantage over the 290hp in the smaller, lighter-weight 1G TLX. If my hypothesis is correct, they really shouldn’t even bother calling this the Type S, because this engine output only allows it to compensate for the weight difference. It’s going to be pretty funny when the road tests come back with virtually identical 0-60 and 1/4-mile times as the outgoing V6 model.
Come on now. If the Type S is only slightly faster than the outgoing model this would be a complete FAIL and a DISASTER.
So Acura, used S5 & C43AMG as a base and build a MUCH slower all new generation Type S. Let's have more faith in them. Look at the NSX. They built a great car. What's holding it back is the price tag. The same engineers were involved in building the Type S. Let's not press the panic button just yet.
Sure, power is not everything. But the cars that have been mentioned as competitors are very good cars AND have more power.
I'm a speed freak and am on a lot of performance car and motorcycle forums. Every so often I see a post where someone says "I'd rather drive a slow car/motorcycle fast than a fast one slow. To which I reply, I'd rather drive a fast one fast.
+1 I want both, great driving dynamics and make it fast. If fast in a straight line was all I cared about I would own a domestic offering ages ago.
I don't get why most here seem so focused on the horsepower and torque numbers. That's not necessarily what makes a car fun to drive or even sell well. Ultimately it is the road tests and comparisons that will make or break the car. Look at Mazda cars - any of them - all of them. Consistently underpowered among their competitors yet delivering a driving experience that is more satisfying, and consistently getting raves from automotive journalists. Big power numbers are good for nothing but paper. It is where the rubber meets the road that matters. And I am not talking about 0-60 numbers. That too is meaningless in regular or even spirited driving (do you use launch mode or rev and dump your clutch in every day driving?). It is things like nimbleness/agility, steering feel and response, passing power, etc. that will make the difference. I hope Acura delivers on those.
1) Mazda sells because their cars look good and the interior is more upscale than the competition. Has little to do with the "driving experience".
2) Mazda isn't selling nearly as well as cars with a lesser "driving experience".
They sold 154K CX5's last year. That sounds good, but Honda sold 384K CRVs, Toyota sold 448K RAV4s, Nissan sold 350K Rogues, Ford sold 240K Escapes, hell even Subaru sold 180K Foresters. And while I'll be the first to say I'd buy a CX5 over all of those, it's not because of the "driving experience".
But wait, you say, it's not fair to look at the crossovers, since nobody buys those for the driving experience. OK in that case, let's look at their bread and butter compact sedan.
Mazda sold just 50K Mazda3s last year (bear in mind it was even a new generation, one that reviewers praised). Honda sold 325K of its aging Civic, Toyota sold 222K of its Corollas, Nissan sold 184K of its Sentras, Hyundai sold 175K of its Elantras, VW sold 100K Jettas, Kia sold 95K Fortes, and even Subaru sold 66K Imprezas.
So even if you're right that Mazdas have a better "driving experience", clearly it is not resonating with buyers. And for the select few who do want an engaging driving experience? Well, more powerful alternatives exist that drive just as well, so it's no wonder they're getting shown up in the sales column.
Come on now. If the Type S is only slightly faster than the outgoing model this would be a complete FAIL and a DISASTER.
So Acura, used S5 & C43AMG as a base and build a MUCH slower all new generation Type S. Let's have more faith in them. Look at the NSX. They built a great car. What's holding it back is the price tag. The same engineers were involved in building the Type S. Let's not press the panic button just yet.
If Acura were to read these threads, I think it will teach them to never release info on a car this early.
Sounds like most Acura enthusiasts that were originally interested in the Type-S have already talked-themselves out of it ... before it even hits the showroom floor.
Last edited by Tesla1856; 08-17-2020 at 12:15 AM.
Reason: typo
If Acura were to read these threads, I think it will teach them to never release info on a car this early.
Sounds like most Acura enthusiasts that were originally interested in the Type-S have already talked-themselves out of it ... before it even hits the showroom floor.
It has plenty of power for me. The Accord Sport 2.0 is nice. Love the power it has. If I wanted pure power for it's class, I would have gone with the Fusion Sport with over 300hp and AWD. But I want overall daily driving too. And reliability. Everyone is all complaining about the power numbers. Ugh! Like you said. Power numbers are bragging rights. The Type R beat plenty of cars with more power around Nuremberg. I want to see how driving that much power in a V6 turbo made by Acura with their famous SH-AWD system feels. How the features work. How it looks sitting in my yard when I come out to look at it going to work and when I'm walking into the house. I doubt any of us are going to use the full 355hp it has EVERY day. So people need to stop being so focused on the power numbers.
I think you should walk into BMW and test drive the M340i, since you mentioned it before. You will waste some time in your day but it will give you an idea of it's performance. Once you have that performance and especially as an enthusiast, you get the itch for more power. The temptation to hit that sport plus button and blow someones doors out is high. The 2 out of 3 vehicles owned put down more power than most of what is being discussed here, and I assure you, there's always an urge for more. I think you say you will be OKAY with XYZ til you actually get into something that has proven performance. I know you're a big Acura / Honda fan, but get out there and test drive other vehicles. Across the board, a majority of people lease vehicles. There are plenty of them on here. So the concern about long term reliability and resale is an excuse not to get another brand, IMO.
I doubt any of us are going to use the full 355hp it has EVERY day. So people need to stop being so focused on the power numbers.
Speak for yourself. I want to enjoy that power every day I drive the car. Not saying it will need more HP but using up the 355 here and there on a daily basis would be my plan. I want to enjoy the power, otherwise I would not buy the car. Fortunately I don't live in a high traffic area so there are plenty of roads with nobody in the way. It's pretty easy to use up all 290 HP in the TLX daily and still wish there was more to get out of it, at least for me.
I think you should walk into BMW and test drive the M340i, since you mentioned it before. You will waste some time in your day but it will give you an idea of it's performance. Once you have that performance and especially as an enthusiast, you get the itch for more power. The temptation to hit that sport plus button and blow someones doors out is high. The 2 out of 3 vehicles owned put down more power than most of what is being discussed here, and I assure you, there's always an urge for more. I think you say you will be OKAY with XYZ til you actually get into something that has proven performance. I know you're a big Acura / Honda fan, but get out there and test drive other vehicles. Across the board, a majority of people lease vehicles. There are plenty of them on here. So the concern about long term reliability and resale is an excuse not to get another brand, IMO.
Wrong, only about 1 in 3 new vehicles sold are leased.
Think a lot depends on where & how much you drive. 0-60 is just a measurement, it suggests that cars with a lower number will preform better across the entire speed spectrum. My driving is suburban & highway. I want solid middle range performance for my highway driving.
People who drive in the Carolinas know our typical over the interstate speeds are above average. My typical run to the beach a bit over 200 miles, the normal traffic flow is about 85 in the 70 limit areas in the eastern part of the state which is open country without much population. Most of the interstate is two lanes in each direction. At any number of points you will get a car running 70 or so in the fast lane blocking up traffic. If they will not move over the only way around is to use the slow lane when there are breaks in the traffic. Its not unusual to see 10 or 15 cars waiting to get an opening to work around these cars. The ability to accelerate quickly in the traffic breaks is key to making a safe pass.
That is a basic requirement, but because we also have a lot of quality two lane blacktop like the Tail of the Dragon there is the bonus of the fun factor when you are just out for a ride.
Plus how much faster 0-60 do you think Acura would want to offer? Sub 5-seconds seems like a pipe dream for a mass selling sedan or SUV (NSX not included) with honda/acura. If the Type-S is under 5 seconds to 0-60 then that will be impressive. I'm guessing it'll be around the 5.2 second range.... 4G TL was in the 5.8 range and TLX was about the same.
The 4G TL 6MT did 5.2 on C&D 10 years ago...sub 5 sec is not going to impress anybody in 2020....
Has Honda/Acura ever made a direct competitor to those top dog german sedans?
...the problem is that 355 horses is coming short of a Kia Stinger, never mind the Germans....a spread of only 80 horses between the base FWD 4 banger TLX and the Type S?? Very disappointing....
Got the Z4 M40i for 16% off MSRP once all the incentives were added up.
My CTS-V stickered for 105K with an additional 10K of BS dealer add ons (tinted glass, body wrap, etc...) I paid 88K
Two weeks ago i got my wife Grand Cherokee Trackhawk for 87K (stickered for 99K) and we are talking about a car currently more rare to find than a Ferrari 488 (there are literally way more 488 for sale than Trackhawks on Autotrader). The closest new Trackhawk to Seattle currently is in Sacramento, only 500 built for Model Year 2019 and I suspect even less for MY 2020
A common excuse I'm seeing here is , "HP Isn't everything", "Nobody can use all the power anyway" or "Numbers aren't everything". All which isn't true otherwise cars would still be putting out 120 HP if nobody cared. I always use all the power my cars have. Whether going out for a weekend drive or flooring it to merge on the freeway. Yes I push the car and use all he power. Also Nobody wants to spend 50+ K for a car to feel underwhelmed. If the competition keeps elevating there's no excuse for Acura not to and making excuses for them only add's to their laziness. The only reason they made the Type S was because they actually listened to people's want's even if it's not a huge number. They need to do something other than be known for SUV's.
08-14-2020, 12:21 PM
TLX Type-S
