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.
Since most of the other threads got bastardized into comparing the TLX Type-S to its competitors (guilty myself), let's make a thread into what everyone predicts the TLX Type-S will do as far as times. No comparisons, no lamenting/bitching about if it will be "fast", no discussions on value, etc. Just times. Winner will be the person who guesses the closest without going under (over for the ET), since lower times are actually faster, capeesh? For arguments sake, we'll use C&D as the gold standard here.
leomio85
0-60: 4.7s 1/4: 13.3 @ 105MPH
Winner gets ... fame amongst the Acuraziners as the most knowledgeable king of technical spec know-how about cars that nobody really gives a crap about.
I dunno, just thought it would be fun.
I'd edit the first post to compile everyone's guesses into one post to make it easy, but you can't edit past a certain time after posting. If a mod has the power to do that, by all means.
As per Acura: "The much-awaited new TLX Type S, available in limited quantities, can be pre-ordered from Wednesday, March 17 at 1 p.m. Enter the date in your calendar to get the chance to discover the peak of precision engineering."
lol, I did read one article than had it 4.5. Would be shocked given the weight that it could be even close to that. Then again with the turbo things may surprise but not that much. Acura has been caught in the past overstating HP.
Originally Posted by BEAR-AvHistory
Agree looks like my post around lunch time.
Into the WAG game Type : 0-60 - 4.4 seconds (roll out). 1/4 mile 13.5 @ 104mph.
What is the "roll out"? Not starting from a full stop?
As per Acura: "The much-awaited new TLX Type S, available in limited quantities, can be pre-ordered from Wednesday, March 17 at 1 p.m. Enter the date in your calendar to get the chance to discover the peak of precision engineering."
Wonder if they're going to release final figures from performance to pricing on that day.
lol, I did read one article than had it 4.5. Would be shocked given the weight that it could be even close to that. Then again with the turbo things may surprise but not that much. Acura has been caught in the past overstating HP.
What is the "roll out"? Not starting from a full stop?
I put the over under at 5 seconds.
Roll out is how the magazines test the standing start. Its a 1 foot dead zone between where the car is standing & the clock trigger it. Typically worth .2 or .3 seconds on a street car. What they are doing is simulating a drag strip starting light configuration. The staged lights, where the car is stopped to launch from & the clock start/foul light is spaced 1 foot apart. So yes the car is actually rolling when the timer starts.
Example:
When you roll up to the line the pre-stage light will turn on. You creep forward till the staged light turns on. The tree will start the countdown .5 second per amber light. Green is the launch light. (any hope of winning you learn how to launch on the last yellow) The car rolls forward & trips the timer start light. (the roll-out)
One of my Z4 Dragy runs showing roll out (C&D) type number 3.99 & street start actual time 4.31.
Last edited by BEAR-AvHistory; 03-16-2021 at 11:55 AM.
Thought I should explain this(any hope of winning you learn how to launch on the last yellow) a little better. Hope I don't add more confusion. There is a 1/2 second gap between the last yellow/amber light & the Green light turning on. To win you want to be moving when the green light goes on but not have uncovered the stage light sensors. Your personal reaction time watching the lights is key.
If you wait till you see green the other car might already be in motion. You want to start your reaction to the light on the last yellow because by the time your brain processes what it sees, moves your feet & the car moves takes time. The time you are burning is the dead time between the yellow & green lights instead of time after the green light. I was driving a 4MT so I started my launch as the last yellow/amber light started to color.
Also the bigger shadow you can create with your front wheels on the staged lights sensors the less likely you will red light (foul). This is car placement in the stage lights. You want to just trip the stage light so as your wheel moves forward the beam is blocked as long as possible. If you go to far into the staging beams it will take less time to unblock the beam as you roll forward. Unblock the sensor before the green light comes on you red light (foul) & automatically loose. That is you loose unless your opponent screws up the launch worse that you do.
If you can get away with it going into the stage lights on an angle will keep the beam blocked longer that if you go straight it. How much you can get away with depends on the starter. To big of a bite & he can make you restage.
My old race car had a habit of hooking the rear to the left on a hard launch so I used to try to get into the staging lights with the nose of the car pointing as much to the left as I could get away with. The angle shaded the beams with the front tires for a longer time & the cars tendency to drift the rear left straightened it out in relation to the track without a lot of steering inputs.
Roll out is how the magazines test the standing start. Its a 1 foot dead zone between where the car is standing & the clock trigger it. Typically worth .2 or .3 seconds on a street car. What they are doing is simulating a drag strip starting light configuration. The staged lights, where the car is stopped to launch from & the clock start/foul light is spaced 1 foot apart. So yes the car is actually rolling when the timer starts.
Example:
When you roll up to the line the pre-stage light will turn on. You creep forward till the staged light turns on. The tree will start the countdown .5 second per amber light. Green is the launch light. (any hope of winning you learn how to launch on the last yellow) The car rolls forward & trips the timer start light. (the roll-out)
You win ... absolutely nothing! But, you are clearly a god amongst men.
Source:
Thanks to @dc17h21o4n for sourcing C&D's numbers prior to the review being posted online.
Numbers:
0-60 - 4.9s
1/4 mile - 13.6s @ 103 mph
0-100 - 12.6 s
0-130 - 24.2 s
5-60 5.5 s
Braking 70-0 - 165 ft
Braking 100-0 - 359 ft
300ft Skidpad - 0.96g
How the hell did Redline Reviews get 4.58s when C&D pretty much beats the shit out of cars to get the best time. I'm officially starting to doubt his testing.
Congrats Elin, nice win. I was close but no cigar. "Into the WAG game Type : 0-60 - 4.4 seconds (roll out 4.7) 1/4 mile 13.5 @ 104mph". Car is a shade slower than I thought it would be.
How the hell did Redline Reviews get 4.58s when C&D pretty much beats the shit out of cars to get the best time. I'm officially starting to doubt his testing.
Same way he got it to beat an S4 ... there's tomfoolery afoot ...
One other thing I stumbled across. The Type-S's performance numbers are damn near identical to the Infiniti Q50S. No, not the Red Sport 400 ... the plain Jane one with 300HP. Their curb weights are surprisingly similar too. It's uncanny how similar the numbers are.
Braking and road handling numbers from C&D kinda matches up with the 0-60 performance. Nothing compelling to buy now at sticker or above rather than wait till the early buyers do their thing. I couldn't see paying 50k plus for it with those numbers. Does seem to make the Audi/BMW look like a good deal even though a little costlier.
Wait a second, didn't Acura say this is the quickets sedan they've ever built? But unless my eyes deceive me, the numbers look almost identical to the RLX SH that C&D tested. I guess technically it is a smidge faster to 100...but come-on, that's hardly a claim that's true in spirit.
Wait a second, didn't Acura say this is the quickets sedan they've ever built? But unless my eyes deceive me, the numbers look almost identical to the RLX SH that C&D tested. I guess technically it is a smidge faster to 100...but come-on, that's hardly a claim that's true in spirit.
Wait a second, didn't Acura say this is the quickets sedan they've ever built? But unless my eyes deceive me, the numbers look almost identical to the RLX SH that C&D tested. I guess technically it is a smidge faster to 100...but come-on, that's hardly a claim that's true in spirit.
…and looks like it’s only a bit quicker to 100mph than the 1G TLX 3.5 PAWS
You win ... absolutely nothing! But, you are clearly a god amongst men.
Source:
Thanks to @dc17h21o4n for sourcing C&D's numbers prior to the review being posted online.
Numbers:
0-60 - 4.9s
1/4 mile - 13.6s @ 103 mph
0-100 - 12.6 s
0-130 - 24.2 s
5-60 5.5 s
Braking 70-0 - 165 ft
Braking 100-0 - 359 ft
300ft Skidpad - 0.96g
Honestly, all I did was shave a second off of the 6.2 sec I estimated from SG's video review of the 2.0L TLX. If I had deducted C&D's 0.3 sec roll out, I would have gotten the 4.9 sec spot on!
I don't envy Acura's PR/marketing dept as it will take quite a bit of effort to move beyond this FUBAR situation.
I was expecting TLX-S 0-60 numbers similar to 540xi and E450 (V6 version), so around 4.6-4.7 sec. If Acura knew about straight line performance, they should have managed customer expectations better by not creating too much hype around performance.
I am happy that it got 0.96 on skid pad matching that to 340xi and better then 540xi.
02-11-2021, 04:16 PM
lol
