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.
There's good news and bad news when it comes to the new Honda Civic Type R. The good news is that after more than a year of prototypes and concepts, the Japanese automaker's new hot hatch is about to make its production debut next month. The bad news is that it's not coming here, but there is a silver lining in even that dark rain cloud – namely, that Honda plans on slotting its 2.0-liter VTEC turbo four into something that it will actually offer Stateside. Earlier rumors suggested the US donor vehicle would also be a Civic, but the latest intel indicates it could be something different, albeit related.
According to Car and Driver, which spoke recently with Acura product planning manager Gary Robinson, Honda's luxury division could be gearing up to shoehorn the engine into the recently updated ILX – which itself is based on the Civic. "Acura is always going to get the best engines Honda makes," said Robinson. "Obviously a 2.0-liter turbo is more of a must-have in the luxury world than it is in the mainstream" market, suggesting that an ILX Type S could be in the works with upwards of 300 horsepower.
TLX is bigger. Most average Acura buyers (non-enthusiasts) don't care that the ILX has the same deal but lighter. ILX is still a Civic and TLX is still an Accord.
So...just buy a Civic or Accord and save your money for a vacation or something. They are both so very similar to their lower market siblings that it's just not worth the price premium anymore.
Originally Posted by oonowindoo
There is also a big group of people who think
Old ILX is ugly or interior is not good enough or 150HP (they don't know what that means but they know it is not a lot)
Now the new ILX is "prettier" with better interior and more features and more power.
With the price difference, this group of people will definitely consider ILX if they had no choice but to get TLX before.
So...just buy a Civic or Accord and save your money for a vacation or something. They are both so very similar to their lower market siblings that it's just not worth the price premium anymore.
You obviously haven't driven any of these cars or you're brain dead. The Acuras a so much better, it's embarrassing how much "Car guys" bring this topic up.
You obviously haven't driven any of these cars or you're brain dead. The Acuras a so much better, it's embarrassing how much "Car guys" bring this topic up.
Its embarrassing how much the fan boys can't open their eyes. I've driven them both, I've had the TLX and ILX as loaners for 2 days each and have daily driven them both for longer than a normal test drive. The Accord is 95% of the TLX for $10k off. The 2015 ILX is a joke at best, we'll see how good the new one is.
Doubt it will happen until next gen ILX....This current platform isn't good enough for 300hp....Besides, Honda already confirmed next gen civic to get downsized engine with turbo....
One major difference between the Audi A3 and the VW Golf variants is product reliability.
VW's reliability is notoriously rated poor, whereas Audi's reliability is significantly better in comparison. A big chunk of premium pricing that goes into an Audi vehicle is spent in product reliability improvements.
Thus, a buyer, who opts for an Audi A3 over other VW Golf variants, knows for sure that he/she is getting a more reliable vehicle, when compared to the Golf variants.
But since an ILX and a Civic are both rated very high in terms of product reliability, the distinction between the ILX and the Civic becomes less defined.
Interesting. I'm not saying Audi is unreliable...but my understanding is that the general public believe European cars are not so reliable...and I'm not sure if people would feel that there's a big difference in reliability between Audi and VW. Again, that's just my observation so may be I'm just out of touch.
Originally Posted by oonowindoo
There is also a big group of people who think
Old ILX is ugly or interior is not good enough or 150HP (they don't know what that means but they know it is not a lot)
Now the new ILX is "prettier" with better interior and more features and more power.
With the price difference, this group of people will definitely consider ILX if they had no choice but to get TLX before.
That will translate to loss of sales for TLX.
I can definitely see this group of people too. No doubt. I for one would go for the ILX and save a few grand.
Originally Posted by SamDoe1
So...just buy a Civic or Accord and save your money for a vacation or something. They are both so very similar to their lower market siblings that it's just not worth the price premium anymore.
Agree 100%.
Originally Posted by SamDoe1
Its embarrassing how much the fan boys can't open their eyes. I've driven them both, I've had the TLX and ILX as loaners for 2 days each and have daily driven them both for longer than a normal test drive. The Accord is 95% of the TLX for $10k off. The 2015 ILX is a joke at best, we'll see how good the new one is.
Guys no need to be disrespectful to each other....it's possible that people might come to different conclusions with the same cars after test driving.
To me, I could definitely keep the performance difference between the TLX 2.4 and Accord I4 CVT. The Accord is very smooth and has good power. But the 0-60mph stats don't lie, the 0.8s second advantage in the TLX is pretty obvious. And I really enjoyed the ultra quick and smooth shifts. The Accord just doesn't have the same pick up from a dead stop. On the hwy though, both are quite close in terms of acceleration, though the TLX still feels a bit faster.
The TLX to me felt like a more nimble car, but is let down by the tires. The Accord is pretty fun to drive too, but it also feels bigger (understandably).
When I drove the Accord, I thought it was a quiet car. But the TLX is simply at class above in terms of noise suppression.
I don't think the material feel is that big of a difference. But the design and features are more attractive. For instance, the TLX dashboard shows more info than the Accord. Important to some people, not so important for others.
In terms of pricing, I think the TLX starts at $31.5k. The cheapest Accord starts at $22k. I don't think the cheapest Accord is really comparable to the base TLX though. I think the base TLX is closer to the EX, or EXL trim, which are roughly $25-$28.5k. I don't think there's a $10k difference?
Interesting. I'm not saying Audi is unreliable...but my understanding is that the general public believe European cars are not so reliable...and I'm not sure if people would feel that there's a big difference in reliability between Audi and VW. Again, that's just my observation so may be I'm just out of touch.
Realistically, the reliability gap between the German and Japanese models is shrinking. The Audi 2.0T engine has been manufactured for something like 10 years, so they have it down at this point (while some of the early ones were atrocious).
That being said, I don't have data, but I believe the real perception of German cars hinges more on their expense to fix.
Realistically, the reliability gap between the German and Japanese models is shrinking. The Audi 2.0T engine has been manufactured for something like 10 years, so they have it down at this point (while some of the early ones were atrocious).
That being said, I don't have data, but I believe the real perception of German cars hinges more on their expense to fix.
In typical Honda fashion, we will all know in roughly 10 more years. They will have to pull the plug on it and start it back up at least 2 more times. Come back in 2025 for more information.
I just saw that you have to option in the Auto Day/Night mirror on the ILX. That is the stupidest thing I have heard of. Didn't acura learn when it was an option on the MDX in 2007??? Shitty 3rd party mirrors that vibrate compared to the integrated, nice factory one that my 2004 TL, 2013TL have!
Guys no need to be disrespectful to each other....it's possible that people might come to different conclusions with the same cars after test driving.
To me, I could definitely keep the performance difference between the TLX 2.4 and Accord I4 CVT. The Accord is very smooth and has good power. But the 0-60mph stats don't lie, the 0.8s second advantage in the TLX is pretty obvious. And I really enjoyed the ultra quick and smooth shifts. The Accord just doesn't have the same pick up from a dead stop. On the hwy though, both are quite close in terms of acceleration, though the TLX still feels a bit faster.
The TLX to me felt like a more nimble car, but is let down by the tires. The Accord is pretty fun to drive too, but it also feels bigger (understandably).
When I drove the Accord, I thought it was a quiet car. But the TLX is simply at class above in terms of noise suppression.
I don't think the material feel is that big of a difference. But the design and features are more attractive. For instance, the TLX dashboard shows more info than the Accord. Important to some people, not so important for others.
In terms of pricing, I think the TLX starts at $31.5k. The cheapest Accord starts at $22k. I don't think the cheapest Accord is really comparable to the base TLX though. I think the base TLX is closer to the EX, or EXL trim, which are roughly $25-$28.5k. I don't think there's a $10k difference?
At the low end it makes sense to buy the TLX. The reason the TLX seems to handle better is because of AWS, the Accord relies on chassis design only. Lets face it, people aren't buying this car for its driving dynamics. For $40k, you can snag a 328i with a good number of options that has driving dynamics in a different league.
At the high end, it makes more sense to buy the Accord.
TLX V6 Advance = $40k
Accord Touring = $33k
So is $7k worth it for you to buy what amounts to a very similar car? Only reason would be for AWD and in that case let me point you to the very excellent IS350 AWD or the 328i xDrive.
So is $7k worth it for you to buy what amounts to a very similar car? Only reason would be for AWD and in that case let me point you to the very excellent IS350 AWD or the 328i xDrive.
Their AWD is inferior in every sense of the word. Xdrive now has torque vectoring that is not brake actuated and still employs a system that overdrives the wheel.
Acura's SHAWD is heads and shoulders above most AWD iterations out there including Quattro. The cost of and equivalent system in any other brand in the market is well over 50K.
And don't get me wrong Lexus does a good job but the only torque vectoring diff they have now is being used in the RCF and is a 7K option.
Ford is finally using the same layout in the Focus RS now. Acura should've thrown it into the ILX a long time ago and given it some more power.
what about for people who don't want AWD? and that is the majority of all car buyers.
Regardless how good SHAWD might be, it is clearly not a strong selling point for TLX because most of the people are buying FWD 4 bangers with tech package.
Their AWD is inferior in every sense of the word. Xdrive now has torque vectoring that is not brake actuated and still employs a system that overdrives the wheel.
Acura's SHAWD is heads and shoulders above most AWD iterations out there including Quattro. The cost of and equivalent system in any other brand in the market is well over 50K.
And don't get me wrong Lexus does a good job but the only torque vectoring diff they have now is being used in the RCF and is a 7K option.
Ford is finally using the same layout in the Focus RS now. Acura should've thrown it into the ILX a long time ago and given it some more power.
I live in one of the most challenging climates in the country and daily drove an AWD BMW for 5 years and never ever had a problem nor did I ever get stuck (and I tried some sketchy shit). So while the Acura's AWD system might be head and shoulders better than the BMW version, the rest of the BMW is head and shoulders ahead of the Acura, same goes for Lexus. So if I never had a problem with the BMW version in 3 feet of snow, why would I care if Acura's is better?
Also, as was said, most people don't even want or care about AWD in their car which is why the #1 selling car everywhere (including here in the frozen tundra) is a FWD Camry.
Saw the refreshed ILX in the dealership today while waiting for an oil change. Nice improvements overall, but I'd skip the goofy looking A-Spec package, looks too much like Civic Si aka ricey.
Saw the refreshed ILX in the dealership today while waiting for an oil change. Nice improvements overall, but I'd skip the goofy looking A-Spec package, looks too much like Civic Si aka ricey.
LOL I'd blame that on the new front and rear bumpers not some skirt extensions and rear valance pieces. Those make it look more acura. It's the redesigned black plastic pieces that make it look like a civic.
I live in one of the most challenging climates in the country and daily drove an AWD BMW for 5 years and never ever had a problem nor did I ever get stuck (and I tried some sketchy shit). So while the Acura's AWD system might be head and shoulders better than the BMW version, the rest of the BMW is head and shoulders ahead of the Acura, same goes for Lexus. So if I never had a problem with the BMW version in 3 feet of snow, why would I care if Acura's is better?
Also, as was said, most people don't even want or care about AWD in their car which is why the #1 selling car everywhere (including here in the frozen tundra) is a FWD Camry.
I never said you're going to have a problem, I'm stating facts.
My 3rd gen 6spd TL has had no issues in the snow and my 92 RWD Sc400 hasn't had any issues in deep snow either. That doesn't mean those are great for everyone. Opinions are subjective.
Personally I'd have the TLX with SHAWD and good narrow snow tires and be able to use the performance very very well. But that's coming from someone who know's how to use it's performance.
People may or may not care but if you're going to talk about an advanced system, the Acura is better. Period.
I never said you're going to have a problem, I'm stating facts.
My 3rd gen 6spd TL has had no issues in the snow and my 92 RWD Sc400 hasn't had any issues in deep snow either. That doesn't mean those are great for everyone. Opinions are subjective.
Personally I'd have the TLX with SHAWD and good narrow snow tires and be able to use the performance very very well. But that's coming from someone who know's how to use it's performance.
People may or may not care but if you're going to talk about an advanced system, the Acura is better. Period.
Do you really thing the average car buyer cross-shopping these cars knows that? Somehow, I am very skeptical that more than a small % of the potential buyers actually realize any of the brands' AWD systems are materially different.
Realistically, the reliability gap between the German and Japanese models is shrinking. The Audi 2.0T engine has been manufactured for something like 10 years, so they have it down at this point (while some of the early ones were atrocious).
That being said, I don't have data, but I believe the real perception of German cars hinges more on their expense to fix.
Originally Posted by usdmJON
And their electrical.
That's the trend I heard regarding reliability. And I think you have a great point there too regarding the repair cost.
Originally Posted by SamDoe1
At the low end it makes sense to buy the TLX. The reason the TLX seems to handle better is because of AWS, the Accord relies on chassis design only. Lets face it, people aren't buying this car for its driving dynamics. For $40k, you can snag a 328i with a good number of options that has driving dynamics in a different league.
At the high end, it makes more sense to buy the Accord.
TLX V6 Advance = $40k
Accord Touring = $33k
So is $7k worth it for you to buy what amounts to a very similar car? Only reason would be for AWD and in that case let me point you to the very excellent IS350 AWD or the 328i xDrive.
It's a little bit of everything. They tuned the suspension a bit differently; they made the chassis a little bit stiffer; they added P-AWS, etc. It's more of less the same as how the 2G TL is related to the 6G Accord, and how the 3G TL is related to the 7G Accord, etc.
No, people don't buy the TLX because of its dynamics. They buy it because of the standard features, very good NVH, decent power, predictable handling, relative competitive price, etc.
Of course it would make more sense to get the Accord from a value point of view. Honda moves about 350k-400k Accords annually. OTOH, Acura is looking to shift may be 40-50k TLX's. Econ 101 tells us that based on economies of scale, the Accord would be cheaper to manufacture than the TLX, and thus it can be sold for less money. I think we also know that we need to pay a bit more money for something that is not as common (that is not to say the TLX is exclusive).
In short, you are paying a significant chunk of money for something that has a bit more features, a little bit better handling, a bit more comfortable, and a bit more unique.
The IS350 AWD is a great car. I think Lexus did an excellent job with its handling. it comes down to whether you are okay with going with the base IS350 AWD though which is at $42-$43k. That's already more money than a TLX AWD Tech. You are basically trading a lot of features for a more entertaining driving experience. However, if you want the luxury goodies too, then you are looking at about $50k. I'm sure it's worth it for some people as the IS is pretty popular too.
Originally Posted by oonowindoo
what about for people who don't want AWD? and that is the majority of all car buyers.
Regardless how good SHAWD might be, it is clearly not a strong selling point for TLX because most of the people are buying FWD 4 bangers with tech package.
I don't think that was the original point?
The original discussion began here:
Originally Posted by SamDoe1
So is $7k worth it for you to buy what amounts to a very similar car? Only reason would be for AWD and in that case let me point you to the very excellent IS350 AWD or the 328i xDrive.
d1sturb3d119 then argued, IF we are talking about AWD, then the AWD system in the TLX is superior.
Obviously not everyone needs AWD and that's another topic.
Originally Posted by SamDoe1
I live in one of the most challenging climates in the country and daily drove an AWD BMW for 5 years and never ever had a problem nor did I ever get stuck (and I tried some sketchy shit). So while the Acura's AWD system might be head and shoulders better than the BMW version, the rest of the BMW is head and shoulders ahead of the Acura, same goes for Lexus. So if I never had a problem with the BMW version in 3 feet of snow, why would I care if Acura's is better?
Also, as was said, most people don't even want or care about AWD in their car which is why the #1 selling car everywhere (including here in the frozen tundra) is a FWD Camry.
I don't think the acura's system is so much about not getting stuck in the snow. It's more about how it improves the handling...you know, driving dynamics. We've seen how the system helps the 4G TL 6MT keep up with a much more powerful Audi S4 V8 in a few track tests. For most cars, AWD system means more weight, slower performance, more dull handling, and more understeer.
Of course, you may say, who cares about lap times? But, aren't we talking about driving dynamics here? Lap times is just another way to show how well a car handles.
Originally Posted by ttribe
Do you really thing the average car buyer cross-shopping these cars knows that? Somehow, I am very skeptical that more than a small % of the potential buyers actually realize any of the brands' AWD systems are materially different.
Indeed. Though the same argument applies to whether the average car buyer knows if a car is FWD, AWD, or RWD. Heck, my dad thought his EF Civic was RWD.
Do you really thing the average car buyer cross-shopping these cars knows that? Somehow, I am very skeptical that more than a small % of the potential buyers actually realize any of the brands' AWD systems are materially different.
Like I said I'm just stating facts. Acura's biggest mistake was not marketing the shit out of how high tech the system is. They didn't have press events like BMW or Audi does to talk up their products.
Even their idiot sales reps don't talk about it. Sad stuff. Now Ford has the same implementation in the Focus ST which will be awesome.
Hell even the whole symmetrical AWD crap that subaru pull's has earned them a lot in sales but people don't realize the STI is the only car that has locking diff's. People blindly buy subi's because of the hype surrounding their AWD. The other cars in the range have a single locking diff and cannot vector torque making the symmetrical AWD a dumb AWD system compared to some of the more advanced systems out there.
This is also why I make it a point to mention it where I can. If you want advanced this is it. A similar quattro system would run you upwards of 70K. And I'm not talking about brake actuated torque vectoring. The Evo employs the same system and so does the GTR. Lexus RCF now has it as well. Not too many cars within the 100K mark using this tech.
There are folks getting 30mpg+. Neuronbob's car isn't doing as well, at 23mpg or so. He's taking the car in to check if there's something wrong. Of course, people that can afford a $60k car probably doesn't care too much about fuel economy, and obviously, YMMA.
I don't think getting extremely good mpg is the intent of eSH-AWD. That task is for cars like the Prius or Accord hybrid. eSH-AWD is just a more fancy/pricey approach to AWD. It allows active torque vectoring at all time, helps save a bit of fuel, and improves straight line performance (especially low end torque).
I think it's a pretty useful system, especially if the cost and weight can be cut further down. Another question I have is long term reliability, though I'd think it's similar to other hybrid cars. After all, eSH-AWD is more of less a different way of using hybrid technologies, which have been around for almost 2 decades.
The eSH-AWD is nothing like any of those commonly-used, (comparatively) simple "single motor assist and batteries" hybrid systems.
With so many motors and so much complex electronics to operate and coordinate the 4 driving wheels properly, long term reliability is a big venture into the unknown, especially that Honda/Acura hasn't been living up to its previously-known iron-clad reliability these recent years.
they sat around for several years and then suddenly had to play catch up.....as such..they had been rushing things to the market...that's probably why the reliability has been so-so.
02-13-2015, 07:17 AM
