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.
Without the derision, this forum would be a ghost town. Either that, or the fanoys who went into their hidey-holed private FB group would propagate into an echo chamber of circle-jerking about how the TLX-S is "king." You talk about us haters, but don't address the same delusional fanboyism where people have their heads in the clouds saying how great the Type-S still is despite unequivocal, factual evidence that it's mediocre. So, you're sick of the haters ... I'm sick of the fuckboys who simply praise shit because it comes from their beloved Honda/Acura brand. This is particularly why the brand will stagnate.
Maybe you should test out your theory by leaving and coming back in a couple of months to see if the fourm becomes a ghost town. I'm sure no one will miss you.
This showed up in my mail box today in CR. Interesting comparison to the list they had in USA Today. But since the CR report has been posted in support of the car might as well post one current from today.
Amazing difference in the reliability list & the "I like my car" lists rankings. I know for a fact I would not like an unreliable car. Don't you think people hate reliable cars & love unreliable cars is strange? Can't really comment on this because its so weird, but a lot of people are reading it today.
The fact that Acura managed to snag the Least Satisfying Infotainment award from Lexus is quite impressive. I guess Lexus's switch to a touchscreen system is paying off.
The only feature I don’t like about my A-Spec is the infotainment, particularly the user interface. So, that rating comes as no surprise. Brand was probably so intent of differentiating the TLX from the Accord we got the touchpad system instead of the Accord’s touchscreen.
That said, I suspect that we may see a touchscreen in MMC models in a year or so.
The only feature I don’t like about my A-Spec is the infotainment, particularly the user interface. So, that rating comes as no surprise. Brand was probably so intent of differentiating the TLX from the Accord we got the touchpad system instead of the Accord’s touchscreen.
That said, I suspect that we may see a touchscreen in MMC models in a year or do.
Agree, most likely the most used thing in a car outside of the driving controls. The more attention paid to its design & UI the more pleasant the ride is.
Interesting, thanks. Yes, I guess people's feelings rule them in strange ways.
So, you find your current car's make and see how it did.
Looks like maybe we should all just go buy expensive Teslas (and accept the styling and comfort as good-enough).
Porsche I get. Looks like Genesis fanboys answer CR polls.
Dodge/Ram/Chrysler ... just wow ... who knew?
But seriously ... BMW did good in important categories.
Not surprised by Tesla....Very strong almost cult like following. In the past that was Porsches spot. Porsche interesting case following their posts & my own experience people love the car but hate the pricing. Most shrug their shoulders over the price & buy them. Most profitable mass produced car in the world by a long shot.
Think D/R/C' will fall off as they stop making the Hellcat & Demon engines. Genesis scores well on happy camper, value, styling & driving. IMHO the clear winner on this poll.
Last edited by BEAR-AvHistory; 02-09-2022 at 09:12 AM.
This showed up in my mail box today in CR. Interesting comparison to the list they had in USA Today. But since the CR report has been posted in support of the car might as well post one current from today.
Amazing difference in the reliability list & the "I like my car" lists rankings. I know for a fact I would not like an unreliable car. Don't you think people hate reliable cars & love unreliable cars is strange? Can't really comment on this because its so weird, but a lot of people are reading it today.
My 2020 RDX has been reliable so far at least mechanically with only a hiccup with the fuel pump recall. Other than that, nothing to complain about as far as "reliability" would go. The build quality has been subpar ... so I would say it was "reliable" but I would have given the car a poor ranking in the "owner satisfaction" category if I received one of these surveys.
The only feature I don’t like about my A-Spec is the infotainment, particularly the user interface. So, that rating comes as no surprise. Brand was probably so intent of differentiating the TLX from the Accord we got the touchpad system instead of the Accord’s touchscreen.
That said, I suspect that we may see a touchscreen in MMC models in a year or so.
Honestly, I don't see them doing it on a MMC, but the next generation. I doubt they'll be ditching the TTI completely, but doing like what Lexus did and giving both options. The reason being, they would have to bring the screen closer to the driver to reasonably make it a touchscreen, which would require redesigning the dash and making new molds at the factory ... I highly doubt they'll do that for a MMC, especially seeing as the RDX's MMC rolled out with zero changes to the infotainment (aside from a faster processor).
That being said, back to our original topic. The Type-S is shite and you losers who bought them should feel bad for buying that sack of turds.
1. Honestly, I don't see them doing it on a MMC, but the next generation. The reason being, they would have to bring the screen closer to the driver to reasonably make it a touchscreen,
2. seeing as the RDX's MMC rolled out with zero changes to the infotainment (aside from a faster processor).
1. Agreed
2. It really needs a second data-capable USB port and Wireless CarPlay/AA to stay competitive.
Additionally, I read that 10% of people are left-handed.
Honestly, I don't see them doing it on a MMC, but the next generation. I doubt they'll be ditching the TTI completely, but doing like what Lexus did and giving both options. The reason being, they would have to bring the screen closer to the driver to reasonably make it a touchscreen, which would require redesigning the dash and making new molds at the factory ... I highly doubt they'll do that for a MMC, especially seeing as the RDX's MMC rolled out with zero changes to the infotainment (aside from a faster processor).
Quick note, I didn't indicate the removal of TTI. Rather, I purposely didn't state that in order to imply implementation of a dual mode interface such as that used by the Lexus brand. (I probably should have been a little clearer, particularly given the 'traffic' in this forum.)
As far as screen repositioning, I dont think that's a particularly tall task to bring it forward at a minimal cost. (re: RDX, the lot is already cast for this generation. Hence, a range topping A-Spec Advance for it's MMC rather than a Type S; the latter which didn't necessarily have to be under J30AC power.)
All that said, time will tell and granted, Honda/Acura does less and less for their MMC models these days. So you may be correct in the end.
Motor trend also agrees Type-S has issues if it's a spirited driver's car
It's not a track car
It's the best looking
It's more reliable than the Germans
The other cars all cost more
It's fast enough
It's fast for its size and power/weight ratio
Acura didn't pay Motortrend enough
They're all haters who are paid by the Germans
Did I leave any out?
On a serious note, I'm surprised at their complaints about the brakes being too grabby. On my test drive I thought the sensitivity was fine, and that the brakes were actually one of the better parts about the car. I wonder if Acura swapped out the pads for a set of track pads and that's what's resulting in the issue with the brakes.
When I got to drive the car at 7/10ths, I thought it was great, even though it did need a bit more power. Disappointing to read that at 10/10ths it falls apart.
Very surprising that both MT and TH have now complained about the SH-AWD system at the limit...I again can't help but wonder if the computers are pulling back in order to protect the driveline. I hypothesized that the SH-AWD (and not the 10AT) is the limiting factor for the regular TLX and RDX and why it needs to pull power in lower gears, and even though Acura says they beefed it up here for the Type S, maybe it wasn't beefed up enough to handle sustained driving at the limits? Could it be refusing to send power to the rears to prevent overheating or burning up the clutch packs / diffs?
There were talks of it back in 2014, but it never happened. I think that they realized that their customer base is too price sensitive and going AWD-only would alienate too many buyers. https://www.autoweek.com/news/a19081...el-drive-only/
Audi can get away with being a de facto AWD brand because their customer base is less focused on value, but the reality is that Acura cannot.
I won’t agree or dissagree with your point. BUT, how the hell can a “premium” brand expect to survive if they are as price sensitive as their bread and butter brand? Acura started out string but then backed themselves into becoming overly price sensitive by not taking the following they had developed with the Legend and nurturing it. I’ll never forget when they traded the wildly popular Legend name for “RL” because “the Legend name had become better known than the Acura name”, or something to that effect. Ford did the same thing with the Taurus brand. Traded it for “500” until Ford brought a new CEO who said “why did we give up a name that we had invested so much positive image in”. Sadly Ford screwed up the next generation Taurus anyway.
On a serious note, I'm surprised at their complaints about the brakes being too grabby. On my test drive I thought the sensitivity was fine, and that the brakes were actually one of the better parts about the car. I wonder if Acura swapped out the pads for a set of track pads and that's what's resulting in the issue with the brakes.
Acura installed their factory recommended high performance pads used at Laguna Seca, This is legal at LL as any optional performance equipment available for the car is legal. BMW screwed up & paid the price by not suppling spare tires. The also sent the M240 with A/S tires instead of the optional no charge Michelin 4S4 summer tires. C&D suggested the will bring it back next year for another shot since its a larger new generation this year.
I won’t agree or dissagree with your point. BUT, how the hell can a “premium” brand expect to survive if they are as price sensitive as their bread and butter brand? Acura started out string but then backed themselves into becoming overly price sensitive by not taking the following they had developed with the Legend and nurturing it. I’ll never forget when they traded the wildly popular Legend name for “RL” because “the Legend name had become better known than the Acura name”, or something to that effect. Ford did the same thing with the Taurus brand. Traded it for “500” until Ford brought a new CEO who said “why did we give up a name that we had invested so much positive image in”. Sadly Ford screwed up the next generation Taurus anyway.
My take is that Acura wanted to go Tier 1 luxury at some point, but never were able to for a variety of reasons. The biggest is likely that they never had anything that was seen as a proper luxury sedan in the same vein as the S-Class, 7-Series, A8, hell even Q45 because they were never given a RWD V8. The switch from names to letters was a desire to move in that direction, but then the 2008 recession hit and that put the kibosh on that. IIRC they even had marketing material and whatnot aimed to going Tier 1. Whether or not they would have succeed is a different matter (I personally don't think they would have with the current hard and soft products), but they had the intention to try.
I think the other problem is that a concept of a true luxury brand is fundamentally antithesis to what Honda is all about. Hondas are supposed to be sensible cars that give you everything you need and nothing you don't. Efficient use of resources, strong value, no pretentions, built by engineers first and designers second. That's great and noble and all that, but that's not what people who want luxury cars look for.
Playing in the middle segment is also the safe choise in the short term. Historically, there's been an opening in this segment, where the only real competition they had came from the likes of Audi, Infiniti, Volvo, Saab, Buick, Olds, etc. And over the past decade or two, Audi has gone upmarket, Volvo is going upmarket, and Infiniti is seemingly going downmarket, and the others are either irrelevant or dead. Nobody at Acura is going to get fired for staying in this space, but if they tried to go upmarket and failed, somebody is probably losing their head over that.
Longer term I think it's a problematic space to be in. In business school one of the things they espouse is that for consumer goods, you generally don't want to be playing in the middle; you either want to be on the high end or low end. The middle is where companies go to die. The same mantra holds true for cars. It's really difficult to defend the middle from encroachment on both sides, and it's hard for you to move upmarket. Companies at the high end have a defensible moat thanks to their brand recognition; take for instance Lexus, which after all these years is still seen as below the Germans, or Genesis which isn't taken seriously by the general public. Cars at the low end also have a steady customer base (there will always be people on a budget who are price sensitive), and it's hard for new entrants to enter because the capital costs required to become a volume car manufacturer is prohibitively high. However, the middle has neither of those protections. The low-end can start penetrating the middle because brand equity places is valued less by these consumers, and those manufacturers already have most of the capital costs covered. We're already seeing automakers like Mazda, Hyundai/Kia, hell even Honda start creeeping into the premium space. And similarly, the middle isn't protected from the top-end, because those automakers can always start skimming down since they too already have everything they need to build cheaper cars. See cars like the A/CLA class, GLA, 1/2 series, A3, etc. Unless things change, Acura is going to have their territory completely enveloped by a combination of the high end and lower end manufacturers, and at that point I really wonder what their play will be to stay relevant.
My take is that Acura wanted to go Tier 1 luxury at some point, but never were able to for a variety of reasons.
That was a stated goal for the forth generation. (The models are on their way) Was a still born effort because of the design that cost them 50% of their sales base right from the start.
Aug 11, 2008 — Acura will become a Tier 1 luxury brand — the models are on their way. So says Dan Bonawitz, vice president for corporate planning and development.
Last edited by BEAR-AvHistory; 02-09-2022 at 01:46 PM.
Give the 2.0T to the CR-V with some suspension tweaks. High-$30k. CR-V Si?
Give the 3.0T to the Accord in Sport and Touring trim, non-torque vectoring diff AWD, curb weight of 3600-3700lbs. Low to mid-$40k. Accord Si?
The rabid fanboyism would be insufferable, but I’d be in line for one, probably both. Just so long as it didn’t become another CTR with jerkoffs paying $10k over sticker.
Acura installed their factory recommended high performance pads used at Laguna Seca, This is legal at LL as any optional performance equipment available for the car is legal. BMW screwed up & paid the price by not suppling spare tires. The also sent the M240 with A/S tires instead of the optional no charge Michelin 4S4 summer tires. C&D suggested the will bring it back next year for another shot since its a larger new generation this year.
The M240i in C/D LL was using the Pirelli P Zero PZ4 Run Flat, which are categorized as Max Performance Summer tires as per Tirerack. However in reality, these are not track tires like the P Zero Corsa or P Zero Trofeo R tires from Pirelli. So while one lap pace is decent, they do get worn out and overheat rather quickly when driven on the track. We can already see the same thing with the TLX-S. Not having spares is definitely a disadvantage for the M240i. I agree, I also wonder how this M240i and TLX would do on Pilot Sport 4S or even Cup 2 or Cup 2R tires.
Give the 2.0T to the CR-V with some suspension tweaks. High-$30k. CR-V Si?
Give the 3.0T to the Accord in Sport and Touring trim, non-torque vectoring diff AWD, curb weight of 3600-3700lbs. Low to mid-$40k. Accord Si?
The rabid fanboyism would be insufferable, but I’d be in line for one, probably both. Just so long as it didn’t become another CTR with jerkoffs paying $10k over sticker.
I think the problem is that why would Honda want to charge $39k for a 2.0T CRV Si when they are able to sell a $50k RDX with the same engine and suspension tweaks? Likewise, why would Honda want to charge $45k for a Accord Si with 3.0T when they have trouble making enough $53k TLX-S to meet the demand?
And then there's also the cash cow known as the MDX too.
The M240i in C/D LL was using the Pirelli P Zero PZ4 Run Flat, which are categorized as Max Performance Summer tires as per Tirerack. However in reality, these are not track tires like the P Zero Corsa or P Zero Trofeo R tires from Pirelli. So while one lap pace is decent, they do get worn out and overheat rather quickly when driven on the track. We can already see the same thing with the TLX-S. Not having spares is definitely a disadvantage for the M240i. I agree, I also wonder how this M240i and TLX would do on Pilot Sport 4S or even Cup 2 or Cup 2R tires.
Agree as the Michelin's are non-run flats & also listed as one of the 9 M240 wheel/tire choices. 8 of the choices are no charge. This includes RTF & Non-RFT, both in A/S & Performance . That said what I believe is C&D wanted was the Tire & cooling performance pack @ $2400. This includes the non run flat Michelins plus a track specific cooling package.
I think the problem is that why would Honda want to charge $39k for a 2.0T CRV Si when they are able to sell a $50k RDX with the same engine and suspension tweaks? Likewise, why would Honda want to charge $45k for a Accord Si with 3.0T when they have trouble making enough $53k TLX-S to meet the demand?
And then there's also the cash cow known as the MDX too.
Very good point. Regardless, it's moot, since it will never happen. But, if they could bring those to market in addition to what Acura brings to the table, they could potentially increase their market share. It may cannibalize some Acura sales, but not much ... even if the hypothetical Accord Si were able to trounce the TLX-S, people would still buy the TLX-S for the looks, SH-AWD, nicer interior, better noise isolation ... and I'm sure there's people who actually buy Acura for the badge . At the same time, there's plenty who find luxury brands pretentious or simply not worth the price premium. Especially evident during the Integra launch, there are plenty of Honda fanboys who apparently deride Acura's existence. As if they were a completely different, competing brand.
I'm sort of in the same boat ... I couldn't care less about the badge on the car. It just so happens that a lot of the enticing cars are coming from the luxury brands or luxury arm of these brands ... and as you pointed out, a big reason is because the profit margins are larger. If Audi lost its marbles and stuck an RS4 (we don't even get it here in N.A.) in the body of a VW Arteon for $55k ... I'd be the first asshole in line.
Very good point. Regardless, it's moot, since it will never happen. But, if they could bring those to market in addition to what Acura brings to the table, they could potentially increase their market share. It may cannibalize some Acura sales, but not much ... even if the hypothetical Accord Si were able to trounce the TLX-S, people would still buy the TLX-S for the looks, SH-AWD, nicer interior, better noise isolation ... and I'm sure there's people who actually buy Acura for the badge . At the same time, there's plenty who find luxury brands pretentious or simply not worth the price premium. Especially evident during the Integra launch, there are plenty of Honda fanboys who apparently deride Acura's existence. As if they were a completely different, competing brand.
I'm sort of in the same boat ... I couldn't care less about the badge on the car. It just so happens that a lot of the enticing cars are coming from the luxury brands or luxury arm of these brands ... and as you pointed out, a big reason is because the profit margins are larger. If Audi lost its marbles and stuck an RS4 (we don't even get it here in N.A.) in the body of a VW Arteon for $55k ... I'd be the first asshole in line.
It’s more to do with personal preference. Not everyone has the same list of priorities ranked. For instance, I traded in my Civic Type R for the TLX Type S for the overall value and luxury. The amount of tech + AWD is of great value at this price range with it being peppy. The only other cars I can think of with the same value including all the features would be the Stinger and G70. It’s a tough choice between the 3 but the ranked priorities is what makes someone pick one over the other. There’s no “wrong” choice when one has everything they need in their choice.
While my Type R would just dominate this car in a track, I really don’t care for that type of competition anymore. Priorities shift :-P
Last edited by richii0207; 02-09-2022 at 06:17 PM.
This showed up in my mail box today in CR. Interesting comparison to the list they had in USA Today. But since the CR report has been posted in support of the car might as well post one current from today.
Amazing difference in the reliability list & the "I like my car" lists rankings. I know for a fact I would not like an unreliable car. Don't you think people hate reliable cars & love unreliable cars is strange? Can't really comment on this because its so weird, but a lot of people are reading it today.
similar studies have been done on motorcycles. Harley and BMW own the owner loyalty rankings. They are also at the bottom of the reliability list.
My take is that Acura wanted to go Tier 1 luxury at some point, but never were able to for a variety of reasons. The biggest is likely that they never had anything that was seen as a proper luxury sedan in the same vein as the S-Class, 7-Series, A8, hell even Q45 because they were never given a RWD V8. The switch from names to letters was a desire to move in that direction, but then the 2008 recession hit and that put the kibosh on that. IIRC they even had marketing material and whatnot aimed to going Tier 1. Whether or not they would have succeed is a different matter (I personally don't think they would have with the current hard and soft products), but they had the intention to try.
I think the other problem is that a concept of a true luxury brand is fundamentally antithesis to what Honda is all about. Hondas are supposed to be sensible cars that give you everything you need and nothing you don't. Efficient use of resources, strong value, no pretentions, built by engineers first and designers second. That's great and noble and all that, but that's not what people who want luxury cars look for.
Playing in the middle segment is also the safe choise in the short term. Historically, there's been an opening in this segment, where the only real competition they had came from the likes of Audi, Infiniti, Volvo, Saab, Buick, Olds, etc. And over the past decade or two, Audi has gone upmarket, Volvo is going upmarket, and Infiniti is seemingly going downmarket, and the others are either irrelevant or dead. Nobody at Acura is going to get fired for staying in this space, but if they tried to go upmarket and failed, somebody is probably losing their head over that.
Longer term I think it's a problematic space to be in. In business school one of the things they espouse is that for consumer goods, you generally don't want to be playing in the middle; you either want to be on the high end or low end. The middle is where companies go to die. The same mantra holds true for cars. It's really difficult to defend the middle from encroachment on both sides, and it's hard for you to move upmarket. Companies at the high end have a defensible moat thanks to their brand recognition; take for instance Lexus, which after all these years is still seen as below the Germans, or Genesis which isn't taken seriously by the general public. Cars at the low end also have a steady customer base (there will always be people on a budget who are price sensitive), and it's hard for new entrants to enter because the capital costs required to become a volume car manufacturer is prohibitively high. However, the middle has neither of those protections. The low-end can start penetrating the middle because brand equity places is valued less by these consumers, and those manufacturers already have most of the capital costs covered. We're already seeing automakers like Mazda, Hyundai/Kia, hell even Honda start creeeping into the premium space. And similarly, the middle isn't protected from the top-end, because those automakers can always start skimming down since they too already have everything they need to build cheaper cars. See cars like the A/CLA class, GLA, 1/2 series, A3, etc. Unless things change, Acura is going to have their territory completely enveloped by a combination of the high end and lower end manufacturers, and at that point I really wonder what their play will be to stay relevant.
similar studies have been done on motorcycles. Harley and BMW own the owner loyalty rankings. They are also at the bottom of the reliability list.
I like my Yamaha but I don't think I would ever equate bikes with a car. You can love a bike even when it does not work but a car that does not work can't get you to work. Same goes for my COBRA. Will put up with a lot more things that I would never consider in a regular car. No Roof, Marginal Heat. Very Heavy Clutch, No PS or PB, Constrictive 5 point Safety Belts, Tires useless under 35 Degrees. ETC. That said love that car its my favorite.
At the end of the day on the CR poll these were cars being cars as rated by civilians not car nutz like some of us. Its CR, they also do washing machines not Car & Driver.
Last edited by BEAR-AvHistory; 02-09-2022 at 08:31 PM.
Agree as the Michelin's are non-run flats & also listed as one of the 9 M240 wheel/tire choices. 8 of the choices are no charge. This includes RTF & Non-RFT, both in A/S & Performance . That said what I believe is C&D wanted was the Tire & cooling performance pack @ $2400. This includes the non run flat Michelins plus a track specific cooling package.
Yup! This is exactly what C/D said,
The M240i didn't really get a fair shot this year. Like every other BMW present, the all-new 2 arrived without extra tires. Also, due to a scheduling mix-up, our 2 didn't have the $2400 package that includes a more aggressive tire fitment and additional engine cooling.
On C/D YouTube channel, they are said they will try to invite the M240i back to next year's LL event so that it can have a fair shot at it again.
Originally Posted by leomio2.0
Very good point. Regardless, it's moot, since it will never happen. But, if they could bring those to market in addition to what Acura brings to the table, they could potentially increase their market share. It may cannibalize some Acura sales, but not much ... even if the hypothetical Accord Si were able to trounce the TLX-S, people would still buy the TLX-S for the looks, SH-AWD, nicer interior, better noise isolation ... and I'm sure there's people who actually buy Acura for the badge . At the same time, there's plenty who find luxury brands pretentious or simply not worth the price premium. Especially evident during the Integra launch, there are plenty of Honda fanboys who apparently deride Acura's existence. As if they were a completely different, competing brand.
I'm sort of in the same boat ... I couldn't care less about the badge on the car. It just so happens that a lot of the enticing cars are coming from the luxury brands or luxury arm of these brands ... and as you pointed out, a big reason is because the profit margins are larger. If Audi lost its marbles and stuck an RS4 (we don't even get it here in N.A.) in the body of a VW Arteon for $55k ... I'd be the first asshole in line.
Yea for those that want the Accord interior space but with more power, and slightly better handling, the Accord Si would satisfy those needs. It will be like the Ford Fusion Sport I suppose. I would imagine many might be turned off by the relatively lack of rear leg room of the TLX compared to the Accord.
Yup! This is exactly what C/D said, On C/D YouTube channel, they are said they will try to invite the M240i back to next year's LL event so that it can have a fair shot at it again.
Took a look at the specs for the PZ4 * at Tire Rack. The BMW tire * is the second team unit. The RFT PZ4 non star comes in two tread wear versions, 280 & 320. The M240 gets the 320 tires. When they get the PS4S * they get a non run flat 300 treadware tire. Car should run better with the higher traction tire.
Will get to tire 255/275X35XZR19 (99Y) change time on the 2020 Z4 late this year or early next year. Will be a chance to try the new P5. Not expecting a major jump over the PSS but would like to eliminate the loss of traction on Launch Control & 1/2 - 2/3 shift.
Last edited by BEAR-AvHistory; 02-10-2022 at 07:52 PM.
Since you though suspension modifications are "much marketing", it's no surprise you'd equate performance engineering with "ricer logic"
It's as good as the other hater who thinks 20 year old brake fluid is fine
Originally Posted by leomio2.0
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.
I thought the TLX-S did better than I expected given its 11.8lb/hp power to weight ratio. That's by far the worst in class. In fact, may be someone can check, but is that there another car that's faster around VIR with the same or worse power to weight ratio? Quite surprised to see it within 3 seconds of a 2017 Civic Type R given that the CTR is noticeably faster on the straight - CTR was doing 136mph before braking into T1, whereas the TLX-S barely made it to 130mph. The CTR also has the Sportcontact 6 tires which are pretty grippy relative to the more pedestrian PZ4 on the TLX-S.
2020 BMW M340i, 3:03.2 2018 Audi RS5, 3:03.9
2022 Lexus IS500 F Sport, 3:04.9
2017 Audi RS3, 3:05.6
2015 Lexus RC F, 3:05.8
2016 Lexus GS F, 3:05.9
2020 Cadillac CT4-V, 3:06.2
2021 Acura TLX Type-S SH-AWD, 3:06.7
2019 Genesis G70 3.3T Dynamic, 3:07.3
2019 Hyundai Veloster N Performance Package, 3:07.7
2021 Toyota Supra 2.0, 3:09.0
2015 Subaru WRX STI, 3:10.5
2015 Audi S3, 3:11.3
2018 Subaru WRX Performance Package, 3:11.5
2018 Kia Stinger GT, 3:11.6 2022 Toyota GR86 Premium, 3:11.8
2022 Volkswagen GTI Autobahn, 3:12.1
I thought it would be closer to 3:10 and be around the likes of a Kia Stinger GT, GTI, WRX. It sure surprised me that it actually beat both the G70 and Stinger, as well as the highly rated Veloster N that has a better power to weight ratio (11.2lb/hp) with the same PZ4 tires.
Shame about the overheating brakes but from experience that sounds like an easy fix with a set of more aggressive track pads (more aggressive than some crappy dealer installed ones), Castrol SRF brake fluid, and perhaps some Girodisc brake rotors. I think that's a much easier "fix" than what's going on with that Lexus IS500 and its overheating transmission despite having a transmission cooler already. That sounds a lot more involved.
I too was wondering what the Acura dealer installed brake pads were in composition and like you suggested better performance brake fluid. Honda recommends DOT3 and not DOT4 for their vehicles (I'm assuming the same for Acur), I think for the moisture absorption rate is lower for DOT3 so good for overall long term maintenance but it's boiling point is lower than DOT4. So as you pointed out a racing brake fluid like the SRF or Motul RBF660 and a set of Hawk DTC-50 track pads front and rear to see what a difference that would make to the Type-S brakes at a track. And perhaps some 2" silicon brake cooling hoses ziptied into the steering knuckle for track day (not pretty but it works )
You'd like the commentary the C&D driver had about comparing the corning and straight speeds contrasted between the 2022 CTR and 2006 Ford GT which produced the same lap time (which was the fastest lap in 2006 3:00.7) 16 years apart, it's in this video that's worth watching since they get into how much performance tire technology has improved that time. From C&D
Parade of Progress
In 2006, at our first Lightning Lap outing, no car broke the three-minute threshold; this year nearly half the field did. The Honda Civic Type R Limited Edition illustrates that steady improvement in lap times over the years—it matched the lap time of the quickest car from the inaugural year, the 550-hp mid-engine Ford GT. So how is it that a front-drive hot hatch—one with 58 percent more weight saddling each horsepower—that you can buy for one-fifth of the GT's inflation-adjusted price can hang with a mid-2000s supercar?
A lot of it comes down to tires. The Ford's Goodyear Eagle F1 Supercars (rumor has it that Corvette engineers nicknamed them "Eagle Superhards" when the Corvette wore them) are no match for the Type R's Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2s. In every corner, the Civic enjoys nearly 10 percent more grip, and the front-driver rips through the Climbing Esses at a 6.3-mph-faster average speed. Let the GT stretch its legs and its supercharged 5.4-liter V-8 turns a 1.5-second deficit at Oak Tree into a 0.4-second lead at the end of the back straight. But in the slower, more technical sections that remain, the Honda whittles away at that lead, reeling the Ford in for a photo finish. Is this a perfect comparison? Of course not. Since 2006, VIR has been repaved, and additional curbing effectively widens the track in a few spots. What is clear is that cars, tires, and lap times have improved massively.
......
This year we spread 21 cars over five drivers—three of whom were on staff in 2006, though not driving in that first year. As always, if there's a vehicle missing from the group, either we've already tested it or the carmaker couldn't supply a car or didn't want to play. Some carmakers like to play, though, and this year there were at least 20 people from car and tire manufacturers replacing tires and making sure their entries were performing at their best.
Clearly, automakers have concluded that Lightning Lap is serious business. While some factory development drivers with thousands of track miles in their cars have occasionally beaten our times, the differences are small, and over the course of 15 runnings, our times have become a benchmark. Which is what we set out to achieve all of those years ago. —Csaba Csere, former editor-in-chief
Acura was forced to change "modify?" the cars suspension to accommodate the 355BHP V6 in place of the suspension components used in the I4 cylinder TLX. "Modify" is a buzz word covering something they had to do regardless. Just sounds cooler & creates a specific performance image in the customers mind, AKA marketing.
Last edited by BEAR-AvHistory; 02-11-2022 at 03:18 PM.
Acura was forced to change "modify?" the cars suspension to accommodate the 355BHP V6 in place of the suspension components used in the I4 cylinder TLX. "Modify" is a buzz word covering something they had to do regardless. Just sounds cooler & creates a specific performance image in the customers mind, AKA marketing.
The Type S feels more nimble and planted than the base TLX (or advance pkg, which is 3k less than a Type S), despite it being heavier. The improvements in the suspension are felt and take it to another level if you have driven one
Last edited by richii0207; 02-11-2022 at 03:30 PM.
Here are some:
1) Fully loaded trim (not a base model) with all features available. Only two features it does not come with are wireless AA/CarPlay and HUD.
2) Improved braking
3) Chassis rigidity
4) Improved suspension
5) Aesthetic changes
This is akin to someone asking “A Civic Type R is just a 306hp Civic, why pay 10K more for 100 hp over an Si?”
Not to be rude but if you have to ask these kind of myopic questions, you should really research more into products.
+1, some people do not understand tiering or performance versions across a given model. CTR is a good example especially beyond the engine with the dual axis front suspension to get the steering axis into the tires center contact patch area.
Since you though suspension modifications are "much marketing", it's no surprise you'd equate performance engineering with "ricer logic"
It's as good as the other hater who thinks 20 year old brake fluid is fine
Increased rigidity and different turning of the adaptive dampers.
There is talk about how this car is quicker by only 3 seconds or slower by only one second. To most people 3 seconds is not much. Its interesting to look at what the significates works on in finish rankings. This is just a 3 second spread it actually covers 52 cars on the LL list. Lot different that it looks like on the small chart below.
Increased rigidity and different turning of the adaptive dampers.
Thanks for posting this. It seems people are misinformed on suspension/handling changes exclusive to the Type-S. Same for those obsessed with 0-60 or 1/4 times not knowing that torque is limited in the lower gears on the Type S although it would be interesting to know what times it would run with the torque limiter removed. I assume it’s there for drivetrain longevity.
Last edited by richii0207; 02-11-2022 at 04:01 PM.
Thanks for posting this. It seems people are misinformed on suspension/handling changes exclusive to the Type-S. Same for those obsessed with 0-60 or 1/4 times not knowing that torque is limited in the lower gears on the Type S although it would be interesting to know what times it would run with the torque limiter removed. I assume it’s there for drivetrain longevity.
You have a source for this? We know this is true for the normal TLX and RDX but I have not heard this claim for the Type S. And even if it were true, is that supposed to make things better?
You have a source for this? We know this is true for the normal TLX and RDX but I have not heard this claim for the Type S. And even if it were true, is that supposed to make things better?
Thanks for posting this. It seems people are misinformed on suspension/handling changes exclusive to the Type-S. Same for those obsessed with 0-60 or 1/4 times not knowing that torque is limited in the lower gears on the Type S although it would be interesting to know what times it would run with the torque limiter removed. I assume it’s there for drivetrain longevity.
Please post a source showing that the torque is "limited" in lower gears to help with reliability. That would make no sense at all because daily driver/GT cars have the majority of the torque at the lower gears just for that reason, daily driving duties. It makes ZERO sense to tune a non track car that way.
Are you suggesting that when Acura said they beefed up the drivetrain to handle the extra power, they didn't beef it up enough to appropriately handle its worst-in-class torque, and had to resorting to pulling power?
02-09-2022, 12:19 AM
. At the same time, there's plenty who find luxury brands pretentious or simply not worth the price premium. Especially evident during the Integra launch, there are plenty of Honda fanboys who apparently deride Acura's existence. As if they were a completely different, competing brand. 
)
+1, some people do not understand tiering or performance versions across a given model. CTR is a good example especially beyond the engine with the dual axis front suspension to get the steering axis into the tires center contact patch area.
