Well now, it landed right between the low and high that I called. Smack dab in the middle. Epitomizes my take on the Type S; not bad, not great, just satisfactory but no more than that.

 

quite the package of handling, weight, and power despite it being FWD. Hats off to the Honda engineers.

Also this quote about the CTR also sums up tire technology over the past 16 years

 

TLX Type-S: 3:06.7

CT4-V Blackwing: 2:55.6
Civic Type-R: 3:00.7
M240i: 3:03.0
Golf R: 3:04.3
IS500: 3:04.9

Much marketing. =P

What I was shocked and impressed with is that the CT5-V BW beat the M3 Competition by nearly 4 full seconds. 2 seconds is pretty significant, but 4 seconds is substantial. Cadillac made some absolutely incredible twin machines. I hope they start making a lot more of them in the future.

 

That’s the Type R emblem living up to it’s name! When I had my CTR, the car always felt it could handle just able anything you throw in it. It reminds me of the DC5 days of how much of a difference between the Type S and the Type R on the same platform.

Cadillac has done one hell of a job with their performance sedans, dominating the competition. The Mustang lap video sound was just…wow…

 

Mach 1 beating out the M3 Comp was also a big surprise to me. In fact, it even beat out the track focused GT350R.

 

I took a spin in an ATS-V a few years ago and was blown away by it's chassis tuning and power delivery. Say what one will about Cadillac, they're definitely not half-assing it when it comes to performance.

 

Honestly, didn't even pay attention to it ... but yea, that is damn impressive. I haven't been keeping up on Mustangs, but it seems the GT350/R aren't offered anymore ... I suppose the Mach1 is the spiritual successor and slotted between what was once the Bullitt and GT350. For $15k less than a GT350R, it's pretty amazing what you get for that package, though I have heard that mark-ups are pretty ripe with them (which is another reason I don't really pay attention to any special edition Mustangs ... they're all way overpriced due to consistent scumbaggery by Ford dealers).

 

Few years ago a friend did a couple laps with a CTS-V coupe at COA for a Cadillac event (GM rented out the track), and was really impressed as well. A few of the various GM personnel who helped develop the V's were there, couple were from Bowling Green and some worked on the ZL1. Cadillac has come a long way in the past couple decades.

 

Apologies for my digression but that Toyota GR86 is really starting to grow on me. (Looks better than the Mark V Supra IMHO.) Would love to see something like this as a return of the Prelude OR a CLX....though Honda would probably ruin it with a 1.5T/CVT/FWD config. (Probably better odds of Nissan bringing something like this to market as a new Silvia/SX)

OK....back to TLX-S talk.

 

I had a chance to AutoX the new 86 a couple weeks ago and it's darn near perfect for what it is. The power delivery is heads and shoulders better than the prior gen, it handles as well as a Miata but with far less body roll, and it's so easy to get the rear to step out and then rein it back in again. If I could justify what's essentially a 2-seater right now, this would be at the top of the list, regardless of price. IMO the fun-to-drive factor is sky high, and that's even before factoring in the low price. Yeah, it's not as fast as a CTR (to say nothing of the CTR LE), but having driven both the new 86 and CTR I'd say hands down that the 86 is way more fun.

 

The value of the total package seems great to me. That’s why I bought it. 😜. If I wanted a track car, I would’ve just kept my Type R. If I wanted a stupidfast sedan, I would’ve bought a CT5-V BW. It seems some of you expected it to be a top performer….

 

I contend that even when you factor in price, it's still not great because it still has notable deficiencies. Once you factor in price, yeah, you pay less than the competition, but you also get less performance. If it were even remotely in the same realm as something like the M340i at the current price point then I would say it's a great car, but frankly it can barely keep up with an S4 in the performance arena. And yes, I had a chance to drive the Type S on some backroads, so I'm not just basing this off of magazine numbers. If you think the car is great, then good for you, be happy with your purchase, but for my standards, it's not great. Acceptable irrespective of price, good once you factor in price, but not great by any stretch.

 

Audi is a bottom tier brand for reliability. So, no for the money pit machine. And which track were you referring to with the statement?

If the Type S is in a different league than it’s competitors, why are there people trying so hard to downtalk it? Maybe I should’ve bought the CT5-V BW just to troll Audi and BMW forums talking about their inferior vehicles being subpar.

 

Not sure what that has to do with performance, but OK.

The test track? Objectively the Type S straight line acceleration is considerably slower than the S4, braking is a little worse, and it pulls just 0.01g more on the skidpad. The problem is that the S4 doesn't really have any serious sporting pretensions; it's largely a more powerful and faster A4, so something that's more "sporty" like the Type S should trounce it, not just keep up. Like I said earlier, the Type S is more fun to drive, but that's the expectation. If it wants to be great it needs to be more than just "fun to drive".

I think it's because even though in reality the performance of the car is a step below the competition, Acura marketed and positioned it to be competitive. It's also priced close enough to warrant that comparison. People were expecting something comparable to the competition, maybe something that slotted in between the S4 and M340i in terms of performance that was more fun to drive and at a slightly lower price point, but what we instead got was something that slotted in below them.

It's also easy to point out where they screwed up. They could have made the car lighter by making it shorter, but instead they opted to make it bigger externally and give it RWD proportions at the expense of weight and cabin space. They put style over substance, which for a self-purported performance brand is head-scratching. Trim a few hundred pounds from the car and I suspect a lot of the complaints go away and maybe it does become a great car.

 

Here's some rudimentary performance engineering. multiple the lap time in seconds x the total price of the vehicle in thousands to give a linear performance value metric. One desires both numbers to be as low as possible so the lowest overall multiple product give the best performance value. Basic example but gets shows objective linear cost*performance analysis, which the goal is to have the lowest number. So this is a objective way to look at the value of the particular vehicle relative to performance.

BRZ 192.4s x $31.455 = $6052sec
CTR 180.7s. x $45.010 = $8133sec
Type-S 186.7s x $55.445 = $10353sec
Mach 1 171.4s x $60.740 = $10410sec
IS500 184.9s x $63.620 = $11763sec
M3 173.5s x $104.595 = $18147sec

So for just four examples, the BRZ offers the best performance value then the CTR, Type-S and Mach-1 are about equal and the IS500 offers lesser amount of performance value, where the M3 is clearly the worst. There's other ways to also incorporate non-linear analysis into the performance*cost equation as well but linear does show the cost of relative performance. So for this analysis the Type-S offers 12% better performance cost than the IS500, and 43% better than the M3. So for the money the BRZ offers a heck of alot of fun for 1/3 the cost performance of the M3.

 

Historical Ranking Class of 2022

#2 AMG-GT Black 2:37.0
#7 911-GT3 2:40.6
#31 Panamera TS 2.47.8
#35 CT5-V 2:49
#42 M5CS 2:50.3
#50 Mach-1 2:51.4
#54 Cayenne 2:52.6
#60 M3 CS 2:53.5
#74 CT4-V 2:56.2
#78 GT-Speed 2:56.2
#110 X5MC SUV 3:00.5
#115Type R 3:00.7
#127 RS Q8 3:02
#131 X4MC SUV 3:02.9
#133 M240 3:03.0 **
#153 Golf R 3:04.3
#151 IS500 3.04.9
#186 Type-S 3:06.7 *
#224 GR86 3:11.8
#226 GTI-A 3:12.4
#229 BRZ 3:12.2

C&D Notes
* The TLX starts off strong, hanging on for 1.00 g through Turn 1. But it works its Pirelli P Zero PZ4 tires so hard that they have only one strong lap in them before getting hot and greasy.

** The M240i didn't really get a fair shot this year. Like every other BMW present, the all-new 2 arrived without extra tires. To avoid prematurely wearing out the rubber, we sent it around the track in anger only four times in two days. The quickest lap came on the third session, and the by-then scrubbed-up tires contributed to a startling amount of turn-in oversteer that robbed some time.

BMW screwed up but what is is, you run what you brung so wait till next year. Think the Caddy was the most impressive car there. Nice to see a USA product at the top of its game. As for the TLX-S after all is said & done its still running with close to 60% of its weight hang out over its front wheels.

 

A few notable wins......the G70 time surprised me considering it's lighter and more powerful.

 

You seem to always focus on reliability when today, most cars are very reliable. Yes including Germans, yes including Audi which is not near the bottom but actually near the top of reliability. While cost of maintenance of a performance car is higher, it's not that much more. Wait until the Type S has to go in for service, prices will be on par with the Germans for routine maintenance because if they consider the car to be a performance variant they will charge more for everything.

 

Just wait until they get the bill for new pads for those Brembos. Going to be eye-watering for less-than-amazing braking performance.*

* Of course if you source the pads yourself, it's way cheaper, and swapping pads on Brembos are really easy.

 

Audi (15), BMW (17) and MB (23) out of 28 for CR's overall brand reliability so they're still middle to bottom. While Lexus (1) and Toyota (3) rule, with Honda (6) and Acura (8) in the top ten.
Cost of routine maintenance for the Type-S will be about the same as the 4 cylinder, same oil filter and I'm guessing about a quart more oil.
I also guess the Type-S will be typical Acura being less than the German for routine maintenance other than tire cost.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/money...vs/6385214001/

 

If only Acura would give us the CATIA files and access to the parts bins, we could have made the 2G TLX Better, Stronger, Faster

+1, overall the TLX sacrificed style over form. To see all the extra space between the firewall and drivetrain to have a longer wheel overhand is blasphemy to me which most probably increased the weight to account for all that structure and material, then has more leverage of the increased wheelbase which requires even more material to stiffen the chassis. TLX competition is ~3800lb (S4) and ~3900 (C43, M340ix), it isn't like American Honda don't know how to engineer/design light chassis. The Accord Sport 2.0 6MT was ~3300lb. and has a fraction of the use of aluminum the TLX has.

 

Not sure I would classify beating a number set 6 Years ago by a 2017 car with a 2022 a notable win then turn around & losing to a 2022 version of the same car. The Veloster N Performance Package should be your big win as it was R&T's Performance Car Of The Year a few years ago. It beat Porsche, StingRay. McLaren, Ferrari, Lamborghini, BMW, MB ETC.

 

I'd have to look more at what those numbers mean because some places report reliability with things like Electrical/infotainment. What type of Oil does the Type S use? Do they require Synthetic? if so the dealer is going to charge you more than the 4 Cylinder. Also as mentioned those brakes on the Type S are going to be twice as much as the base model.

 

Same oil 0W-20 Acura Genuine Motor oil IIRC is a synthetic blend, many (most?) Acura dealers use aftermarket synthetic oil for all models. Type-S requires 1/2 quart more. Can't imagine the cost difference between the Type-S and 4 cylinder is anything significant. Brakes will be more, but figure ~60k miles for average use front brake change so figure every four years for pad replacement.

https://techinfo.honda.com/rjanisis/...BTGV2222OM.PDF

 

I'd actually say the 2019 G70 is the TLX's big win as it is mechanically the same car as the 2022 model, a direct competitor to the Type S, plus it was a previous Car of the Year winner.

 

Yeah, sounds good. My bad thought there was a change in the G70 lineup. Well done for the Type-S

 

My case maintenance is "free", obviously baked into the car price, no free lunch, for 36,000 miles 36 months includes

• Engine Oil
• Engine Filter
• Brake Fluid

• Cabin Micro Filter(s)
• Engine Air Filter(s)
• Spark Plugs

• Remote Control/Key Battery
• Vehicle Check
• Fuel Filter (Diesel engines only)

Used to be up to, through 2017 models, 50,000 miles, 48 months & included:
All of the above + brake pads, brake rotors, and wiper blade inserts

Mine (only used it with Porsche) & the other German mfg, also have prepaid maintenance packages that are a big discount in some cases on more items that would not quality as warranty item. All of the above said they is always a BMW tax on anything outside of the plans. Only way to beat the system is DIY if you are capable.

 

Toyota does the same too.

 

The danger of placing all reliability only on the brand rank. You could be quite surprised if you go to the trouble of drilling down to the actual cars. This is what you missed with the prior post on CR ranking.

CR Car Rankings By Model A to Z

Major change in the world view on reliability of A vs B in those cars we are interested in at LL

OVERALL SCORE
87
Add to Compare
RECOMMENDED
2022 Infiniti Q50
$42,100 - $57,950

OVERALL SCORE
85
Add to Compare
RECOMMENDED
2022 Audi A4
$39,900 - $45,500

OVERALL SCORE
83
Add to Compare
RECOMMENDED
2022 Toyota Supra
$43,290 - $63,280

OVERALL SCORE
80
Add to Compare
RECOMMENDED
2022 BMW 3 Series
$41,450 - $56,700

OVERALL SCORE
75
Add to Compare
RECOMMENDED
2022 Acura TLX
$37,700 - $53,600

OVERALL SCORE
74
Add to Compare
RECOMMENDED
2022 BMW Z4
$49,900 - $63,700

OVERALL SCORE
73
Add to Compare
RECOMMENDED
2022 Genesis G70
$37,775 - $54,750

OVERALL SCORE
70
Add to Compare
RECOMMENDED
2022 Lexus IS
$38,775 - $67,400

 

On that note, I'll put these out there just for reference:

2019 Genesis G70 3.3T Dynamic Speed Test: Lightning Lap 2019 (caranddriver.com)

2018 Kia Stinger GT Lightning Lap Results for 2018 (caranddriver.com)

 

Yeah its getting pretty popular. Not sure if it was the dealer or manufacturer footing the bill but our Genesis Coupe, traded in, was also on the free oil, filters etc deal. Need to check on the Suburban have no idea but the master group is the same holding company for all of brands I have.

 

Was scanning some of the vids we were interested in. When I was watching the Type-S vid one of my pet bitches that one of my fans here said I made to much of came up at LL. Track Pads. I felt they gave the youtubers most of whom never reported it when they waxed enthusiastically about the brakes a false impression just because the calipers had BREMBO labels on them. What is very interesting is the test of the 4G by C&D also had brake issues requiring time outs as opposed to consecutive laps.

C&D Said "Speaking of brakes, the TLX's really aren't up to track work. Our car was wearing more aggressive dealer-installed pads, and even with the upgrade, the brakes wore out so quickly that the TLX started each of our three lapping days with a brand-new set of both pads and rotors."

I know the mantra "its not a track car" but neither are the ones its matched against. Cars need to do just two things to save your life. Turn & Stop.

These words show the difference between real drivers & youtubers at Laguna Seca. The youtubers never pushed the cars hard enough to give an accurate report of the cars capabilities. Still remember the fat guy out for a Sunday drive thinking he was ringing the car out because Acura let him go by himself on a clear track. Think I had a few debates about how did I know how hard he is driving.

 

Commentary about the Type S drive starting at 3:45:

 

+1, thx for posting @6:20 he talks about the SH-AWD and how the Acura people ran there prior to the event and how he also changed his driving style to suit the car better to get better lap times.

Also watched the CTR part and how he praised it as a track ready and how much fun he had driving it.

He also iterates @15:40 what I mentioned earlier in the thread on how major a factor tires have been in improving lap laps since the CTR tied the 2006 Ford GT time with ~2x a power/weight ratio difference and contrasting the higher speed in turns for the CTR vs. the higher straight speeds with the GT. Modern tire technology is amazing as they discuss.

 

I’d say so far mine has been able to turn and stop without a hiccup.

 

This further demonstrates that the Brembo brakes, on the much heavier TLX Type-S, are a necessity and not a marketing gimmick that some perceived.

 

A necessity forced by their own (poor) design choices.

 

..... and obviously still not big enough for track use. Probably need brakes like this big :

 

Man, this "ricer logic" brings me back to the good ol' high school and college days where I'd be chastised amongst my Korean church group for preferring domestic cars over "tuner" cars. American cars were gas guzzlers, heavy, couldn't handle and needed big V8's while Japan was so much more advanced being able to squeeze out X amount of horsepower per liter. All those mental gymnastics and yet I rarely could tell if they actually got on the gas in their Civics, Del Sols, CRXs, Preludes, RX8s, Solaras, etc when we lined up. G35s and 350Zs hung around a little bit better, but still ... bus lengths, but at least they weren't in a different zip code when I let off.

Let's be honest, if you're comfortably affording an M3, CT5-V BW or any of the other cars in that price range, a TLX-S isn't on your radar to cross-shop (nor are any of its competitors in that segment). "Value" isn't high on the priority list. Looking at absolutes, nearly 13s is an astronomical difference in performance on a track. One could make every excuse under the sun, it doesn't change the fact that the two cars are in completely different worlds. I love the Golf R, but no way I'm saying it holds a candle to anything in the M3's tier, regardless of price. Yes, it's cheaper, but realistically, if I'm getting a Golf R, it's because I fucked up my future prospects and can only afford something in that price range. Nothing more, nothing less. I'm not justifying it by saying I got the "better deal" because of dollar per anything.

 

It seems like of all the cars there, the TLX-S had the worst issue with brakes. Why is that? It's not the heaviest. It seemingly has quality brakes (and even upgraded ones) ... poor ventilation? The IS500 brakes turned to mush as well, but it didn't need a new set of pads and rotors for each day. That just seems absurd.