Ken1997TL

Exactly.

And Honda has only recently added direct injection. It continues to stick with SOHC engines. Imagine a tuned DOHC with 'proper' VTEC implementation, direct injection and a proper exhaust manifold...

oonowindoo

We can imagine a lot of things but we are talking about Honda here...

I have imagined Honda would come out with a RWD 350HP Coupe for the past 10 years.

Ken1997TL

Me too.. I've even (politely) begged them to do so at a shareholders meeting.

F23A4

How was the response to your plea?

Ken1997TL

Basically 'Yes, we've heard this before. Thank you for your input. We will study it.'

Apparently I need to buy more shares

fsttyms1

I think it comes down to Honda/Acura need a better group in charge of the study groups.

iforyou

iTrader: (1)

Yea, pretty much. Perhaps the next development would be adding boost?

oonowindoo

Boost my ass... knowing Honda, they will put 2 more batteries in before any FI

F23A4

Edward'TLS

..... and especially that the turbo 2.4L-I4, as used on the previous RDX, wasn't performing too well, it makes sense for Honda to stay away from FI for at least the near future.

03tLsNBP

iTrader: (9)

It wasn't performing well because they put it in the wrong car. They should've stuffed the system into the TSX and mated it to a 6MT. Make it a Type S model. Could have had huge aftermarket support.

But nope. As much as I loved my old 07 RDX, it is in a class of SUV's that demands more refinement and quietness. And now Honda gave up on a brilliant powertrain, instead of developing it more into something like the super smooth and efficient turbo-4 system from BMW. Bunch of idiots.

Ken1997TL

Exactly. Right engine in the wrong vehicle.

Not enough off-boost torque and refinement for the actual (as opposed to intended) audience.

In an AWD TSX, it would have been amazing.

fsttyms1

Or TL. Honda needs to develop a turbo line on the J. Between hondas exceptional mileage and the power of the turbo they could have created a great combo for both power and mpg

fsttyms1

Was at the dealer getting more parts for my 3.7 build and i asked about the RLX. They have yet to sell one. This could be another RL in the making

iforyou

iTrader: (1)

I just don't think Honda is capable of building a world class turbocharged engine yet. They don't want to build ones like those from Ford and GM that can catch fire or perform worse than their numbers suggest. It took Audi and BMW quite a long time to get to where they are with turbocharged engines with no lag and actual, real world benefits.

With that said, it's been said that the next Civic Type R (sorry, not for us in North America) and NSX will be boosted....guess we will see.

Edward'TLS

Honda had developed a forced-induction V6 production car engine more than 24 years back.

Back in 1988, Honda had put in a turbo 2L-V6 (C20AT) into the Legend sedan. That turbo was no ordinary turbo. It was a variable geometry turbo (VGT), with movable internal turbine wanes to regulate the volume and flow rate of the air being pressurized.

At low vehicle speed, this VGT acted like a small turbo with minimal turbo lag and fast spool up time. While at high vehicle speed, it acted like a big turbo generating high volume of pressurized air. (BMW is using 2 turbo-chargers nowadays to achieve the same purpose Honda had achieved more than 20 years ago.)

It's a real pity that Honda pulled the plug after just 2 years, and has not worked on production-car force-induced V6 motors ever since, other than only in racing applications.

oonowindoo

Isnt the next Gen NSX gonna be a Hybrid?

Black Tire

That's easy. That same customer is at the BMW/Benz dealer. Acura needs to stop going after these same folks. They should be producing cheaper performance cars like the did before.

Ken1997TL

Yes. And turbocharged..

Apparently Honda is 'incapable' of making a turbocharged car though, so what do I know?

iforyou

iTrader: (1)

Yea, that car is very rare nowadays. My dad's friend had a white 1st gen Legend. I sat in it before but I was only 5 years old at the time. Not sure if it was the wing turbo model or not.

Yea, it will be hybrid, but boosted too.

Don't get me wrong guys, all I'm saying is that, I don't think Honda can build a WORLD CLASS turbocharged engine AT THIS MOMENT that can surpass BMW's or Audi's. That's not to say Honda is not capable of doing so when the NSX or Civic Type R comes out. That's why I said "guess we will see."

The problem with the K23T in the RDX is that, sure that engine was used in a heavy SUV. But still, compared to other V6 SUV, it was still a gas guzzler. Put that same engine in a lighter car like a TSX, mpg would improve, but relative to other cars in its class, it might still be on the thirstier side. It wasn't exactly lag free even though it had that VFT system.

Ken1997TL

Well a turbo 4 cylinder is a stupid idea for a SUV. They require more torque than an equal weight sedan or wagon due to the increase frontal area (and ensuing drag) so the gas savings are never realized.

iforyou

iTrader: (1)

I think whenever the engine is downsized too much, then that happens. But doing this works very well in EPA cycles...look at Q5, X3, Escape, etc.....

Edward'TLS

However, diesel engines are notorious for their massive low end torque.

So a 4 cylinder turbo-diesel (not a turbo-gasoline) will be sufficient to provide more than adequate power to the smaller SUV's such as the RDX.

Honda has been putting out production 4-cylinder diesel engines in the Europe market for years. All it needs is to slap on a turbo-charger and to willing to bring the engine stateside.

oonowindoo

We all know what Acura can do. The problem is what they will do.

To me, they haven't done anything since introducing 3.2L CL/TL type S, which is about 13 years ago. Then they figured out a way ruin it with a fuked up tranny.

n-spring

I believe they intended to do this at one time. I heard rumor that the engine was going into the Accord and/or Ridgeline, but the engine failed the California emissions tests. Since this happened during a recession, they scrapped it, citing high development costs to fix the emissions problem.

iforyou

iTrader: (1)

Those 2.2L 4-cylinder diesel engines that Honda make for Europe are already turbocharged. They are good for 140hp/258lbft. Without the turbo, you are probably looking at 100hp......

I think it's all down to cost and horsepower. Top of the line CR-V Petrol in UK is £24,105. Top of the line CR-V Diesel is £26,355. That's £2200 difference, or roughly 9% premium. That difference is for satisfying European standards. The premium is most likely higher to satisfy US standards. You are looking at $3k difference in the US between a CR-V that runs on gas and a CR-V that runs on diesel.

For the RDX, it has a V6, and that is more expensive than the I4 engine in the CR-V. In the end, it might be around the same premium as the diesel engine. Both will start at around $34k. In this case, would you consider a $34k RDX that has 140hp/258lbft, or a $34k RDX that has 273hp/251lbft? Does 140hp make sense in a 3800lb compact luxury SUV?

Performance-wise, there's simply no comparison. Fuel economy, the diesel engine is better for sure. But then you need to factor in urea treatment cost, and the higher diesel price. I believe the national average price of gasoline in the US is $3.5/gal, and $4/gal for diesel.

oonowindoo

Since V8 was never in the equation. I really wished RLX had V6TT instead of V6 + battery.

When is Acura going to realize that MPG is not the priority for customers who can afford $60k flagship sedan.

Prestige > looks > Power/features> MPG

RLX only has 2 of the 5

Edward'TLS

By the way, the turbo-V6 Honda Legend was available only for the Japan domestic market, and not anywhere else.

MTEAZY

The TSX was supposed to have diesel (easy job since they sell one in Europe) but it was cancelled because the cost was too high.

Ken1997TL

Yep and I think it was only for 1989

Fibonacci

MPG may not be a priority for luxury car owners, but it is a priority for the Obama administration.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars...andard-by-2025



My personal opinion is that if fossil fuel consumption is to be deemed "evil", then increasing the federal gasoline tax would be a much more efficient method of increasing avg fleet mpg, but that's a topic for another thread.

SSFTSX

Honda CRV in EU has 150bhp/250 ft-lb diesel.

It is assumed there will be new earth dreams 2.2 diesel. after 1.5/1.6 diesel.

optomos

No RWD? Front grill still looks ugly, but at least the rear is better. So disappointed as I was thinking of getting one. Oh well.

SSFTSX

MT has done the comparision. RLX won. It is faster by 3 seconds in 0-100mph. Anything above 100mph will be embrassment for Cadi. RLX also beat XTS by 6mpg in fuel economic. there is simply no contest between two.

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...son/specs.html


. Despite the XTS wearing big Brembo brakes, the RLX bettered it in stopping performance. Not surprisingly, the RLX delivers significantly better fuel efficiency than the XTS. EPA city/highway figures are 20/31 mpg versus 17/26, and in our back-to-back real-world driving our observed figures were even more disparate: 21.6 mpg for the Acura and just 15.9 for the Cadillac.


The XTS shines in physical presence and handling prowess, but takes a big hit because of its clunky user interface and relatively poor performance at the pump. The new RLX might lack the Cadillac's dramatic sheetmetal and doesn't hustle through the twisties with the same athleticism, but it delivers outstanding comfort, a creamy ride, a brilliant combo of speed and frugality, outstanding refinement (at highway speeds its cabin is as quiet as a tomb), and a boatload of technology that's far more accessible on a daily basis.

Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...#ixzz2RCiIgBM0

Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...#ixzz2RCh5RXTN

Hapa DC5

^ linky no worky

oonowindoo

SO RLX beats XTS?

I would be surprised if it doesn't, i will be surprised any of the A6, M35/45, 535/550, E350/550 does NOT beat XTS.

Let the sales #s do the talking. After all that is all it matters.

NSXNEXT

iTrader: (2)

Ding ding ding. Guarantee more XTS's are sold than RLX's.

leedogg

I'm not going to get a car because it wins a popularity contest. The better car is the better car, period.

fsttyms1

Yea, because soooooo many cadi xts and RL owners are going to be buying the cars because of how fast they are above 100 (they also compared the awd version of the caddy vs a fwd acura )

And you do realize Brembos (BBK's) arent designed to stop the car faster (that has more to do with the tires) what they will do is stop the car repeatedly with far less fade

Despite better 0-100 times and better mpg, Ive seen 100x more XTS's on the road than the RL( <-which is 0). And i have to say the XTS looks far better from a styling standpoint. (which is a shame because acura should have learned from the RL)

iforyou

iTrader: (1)

I was in Hong Kong at that time.....so I guess that wasn't the turbo model then.

yea....being better doesn't mean more sales....