Acura: TLX News
08-09-2008, 02:02 PM
#4403
Intermediate
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Tx
Age: 47
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Moog-Type-S
Interior is nice...but no Audi.
Seriously, Audi interiors=boring, overrated.
08-09-2008, 02:22 PM
#4406
hail to the victors
Originally Posted by Dan Martin
I like the interior, but I would be ashamed to drive that thing. Pontiac's design team must have moved in at Acura.
it does look pontiac.. but i'll take G8 over this pile of crap anytime anyday.
08-09-2008, 02:38 PM
#4407
Moderator
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Not Las Vegas (SF Bay Area)
Age: 40
Posts: 63,306
Received 2,811 Likes
on
1,991 Posts
Originally Posted by Teh Jatt
those are probably to reset MPG, trip A/B, etc.
stupid me, thats for the MID
08-09-2008, 06:14 PM
#4409
is Pretty Much a Moron
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Rochester, NY
Age: 38
Posts: 8,140
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
1 Post
I'm surprised how many people like the interior. I think the whole thing is garbage. Unbelievable.
That interior is incredibly busy and looks very plasticky....I guess that may just be the pictures, but in any event, it doesn't hold a candle to the current interior.
A very disappointing package to say the least.
That interior is incredibly busy and looks very plasticky....I guess that may just be the pictures, but in any event, it doesn't hold a candle to the current interior.
A very disappointing package to say the least.
08-09-2008, 06:35 PM
#4410
Originally Posted by TypeSAddict
That interior is incredibly busy and looks very plasticky....I guess that may just be the pictures, but in any event, it doesn't hold a candle to the current interior.
I'm waiting to read if that is real metal. In the one up close pic from Edmunds, it does look like it's real aluminum. But from the other interior shot, it looks like a whole lotta plastic metal. I tend to think it's the cheaper (fake) stuff cause there are just so many curves - it would cost them a fortune to be that detailed. In the current car, the metal is general straight and applied only to flat surfaces. There are very little curves in them.
big time.
08-10-2008, 12:16 PM
#4415
Race Director
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Illinois
Age: 45
Posts: 10,741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
whoever designed the 2nd gen TSX/Euro Accord should've also designed the 4th gen TL 
whatever the case, this TL will still sell unfortunately, but i bet not as well as the 3rd gen because of gas prices and the bodystyle.
time for them to increase production of the TSX?
whatever the case, this TL will still sell unfortunately, but i bet not as well as the 3rd gen because of gas prices and the bodystyle.
time for them to increase production of the TSX?
08-10-2008, 12:54 PM
#4416
Senior Moderator
Originally Posted by chungkopi
i can't find a single positive thing about this TL. this is a disgrace. this is like a bad dream.
The wheels are nice.
But seriosly, other than the styling, the car will be better than the previous gen in every other way shape or form.
08-10-2008, 03:40 PM
#4417
Race Director
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Charlotte(home) /Raleigh (school), NC
Age: 35
Posts: 11,395
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Alright so I was wondering what other forums had to say about the TL and I found something interesting. Look at the pictures on page 16 http://www.clublexus.com/forums/show...351201&page=16 Someone was talking about riots at the dealer in a picture and sure enough a few pages back I find this. Not really a big deal just could have given this forum credit for it. https://acurazine.com/forums/showthr...page=101&pp=40
Oh btw all the other forums mostly dont like it.
Oh btw all the other forums mostly dont like it.
08-10-2008, 03:41 PM
#4418
Originally Posted by krio
ehi!
6.3. inches longer, they say??
HOW much is big this car????
6.3. inches longer, they say??
HOW much is big this car????
08-10-2008, 04:20 PM
#4419
Kang Ho
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: SJ, CA
Age: 41
Posts: 2,872
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wow, this is going to take some time to get used to...The front is not so bad, the interior is not so bad, the rear... I dont even know what to think. It's definitely way out there, but for now it's fugly...Thank god I dont have to worry about the 4G looking good. It'll make my car buying decision much easier in 4-5 yrs. 
I dont even know what to think. It's definitely way out there, but for now it's fugly...Thank god I dont have to worry about the 4G looking good. It'll make my car buying decision much easier in 4-5 yrs.
08-10-2008, 05:16 PM
#4420
The sizzle in the Steak
Originally Posted by Scorp76
Seriously, Audi interiors=boring, overrated.
08-10-2008, 06:03 PM
#4421
Senior Moderator
wtf
08-10-2008, 06:33 PM
#4422
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2008
Age: 48
Posts: 632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by chungkopi
it does look pontiac.. but i'll take G8 over this pile of crap anytime anyday.
I think the new Saturn looks better than this ugly TL.
.
08-10-2008, 06:38 PM
#4423
Safety Car
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 4,411
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by chungkopi
i can't find a single positive thing about this TL. this is a disgrace. this is like a bad dream.
08-10-2008, 08:38 PM
#4424
Intermediate
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Tx
Age: 47
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Moog-Type-S
Put down the bong.
08-10-2008, 08:39 PM
#4425
Intermediate
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Tx
Age: 47
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not sure this has been posted in any of the multiple threads, but here goes;
First drive review...
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...hotopanel..1.*
First drive review...
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...hotopanel..1.*
08-10-2008, 09:08 PM
#4426
Originally Posted by Scorp76
Not sure this has been posted in any of the multiple threads, but here goes;
First drive review...
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...hotopanel..1.*
First drive review...
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...hotopanel..1.*
08-10-2008, 10:11 PM
#4427
Race Director
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Illinois
Age: 45
Posts: 10,741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
thanks for the edmunds review link. even the edmunds editors say that the rearend is strange. everytime i see the rear, it will be unique, but in a bad way.
as for the side view again, i really just see an 04-08 Maxima with Acura badges
look on the bright side, at least the TSX and TL don't look at all the same in anyway shape or form compared the last gens.
as for the side view again, i really just see an 04-08 Maxima with Acura badges
look on the bright side, at least the TSX and TL don't look at all the same in anyway shape or form compared the last gens.
08-10-2008, 10:12 PM
#4428
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2008
Age: 48
Posts: 632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
^ That review is very poor. It claimed the '09 TL SH-AWD 305 hp car being 0.3 sec quicker than the previous gen TL Type-S. So that means this '09 TL does 0-60 in 5.2 sec? .... bull......sh#t.
What is your guess this '09 TL SH-AWD will weigh? I bet ya 4100 lbs. Being 0.3 sec faster than the previous gen Type-S 6MT is a pipe dream.... lollolololo.lollollzzzlolzololzzzz you'd be lucky to reach 7 sec 0-60 and 16 sec quarter mile.
.
What is your guess this '09 TL SH-AWD will weigh? I bet ya 4100 lbs. Being 0.3 sec faster than the previous gen Type-S 6MT is a pipe dream.... lollolololo.lollollzzzlolzololzzzz you'd be lucky to reach 7 sec 0-60 and 16 sec quarter mile.
.
Last edited by Manual Transmission; 08-10-2008 at 10:16 PM.
08-10-2008, 10:16 PM
#4429
Originally Posted by Manual Transmission
^ That review is very poor. It claimed the '09 TL SH-AWD 305 hp car being 0.3 sec quicker than the previous gen TL Type-S. So that means this '09 TL does 0-60 in 5.2 sec? bull......sh#t.
According to Acura, the TL SH-AWD is 0.3 seconds quicker from zero-to-60-mph than last year's TL Type-S, so figure it will run in the low six-second range.
08-10-2008, 10:26 PM
#4430
I drive a Subata.
iTrader: (1)
Originally Posted by Manual Transmission
^ That review is very poor. It claimed the '09 TL SH-AWD 305 hp car being 0.3 sec quicker than the previous gen TL Type-S. So that means this '09 TL does 0-60 in 5.2 sec? .... bull......sh#t.
What is your guess this '09 TL SH-AWD will weigh? I bet ya 4100 lbs. Being 0.3 sec faster than the previous gen Type-S 6MT is a pipe dream.... lollolololo.lollollzzzlolzololzzzz you'd be lucky to reach 7 sec 0-60 and 16 sec quarter mile.
.
What is your guess this '09 TL SH-AWD will weigh? I bet ya 4100 lbs. Being 0.3 sec faster than the previous gen Type-S 6MT is a pipe dream.... lollolololo.lollollzzzlolzololzzzz you'd be lucky to reach 7 sec 0-60 and 16 sec quarter mile.
.
According to Acura, the TL SH-AWD is 0.3 seconds quicker from zero-to-60-mph than last year's TL Type-S, so figure it will run in the low six-second range.
08-10-2008, 10:26 PM
#4431
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2008
Age: 48
Posts: 632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
^ The previous gen TL Type-S 5AT's acceleration is not in the mid/high six-second range, unless you keep your foot on the brake pedal or parking brake jacked up while accelerating...... 
3rd gen Type-S 5AT = 5.9 ~ 6.0 sec 0-60
3rd gen Type-S 6MT = 5.5 sec 0-60
3rd gen Regular TL 6MT = 5.7 sec 0-60
In order for an '09 TL SH-AWD to be 0.3 sec quicker than the Type-S means it's gonna need 5.2 sec..... lol.
.
3rd gen Type-S 5AT = 5.9 ~ 6.0 sec 0-60
3rd gen Type-S 6MT = 5.5 sec 0-60
3rd gen Regular TL 6MT = 5.7 sec 0-60
In order for an '09 TL SH-AWD to be 0.3 sec quicker than the Type-S means it's gonna need 5.2 sec..... lol.
.
08-10-2008, 10:28 PM
#4432
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2008
Age: 48
Posts: 632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by JS + TL
You can't be 32 years old. You can't even be 23 years old.
I'll laugh the fuck at you when you brag about "your" 2011 TL type-S SH-AWD in the future.
I'll laugh the fuck at you when you brag about "your" 2011 TL type-S SH-AWD in the future.
.
08-10-2008, 10:32 PM
#4433
I drive a Subata.
iTrader: (1)
Originally Posted by Manual Transmission
^ The previous gen TL Type-S 5AT's acceleration is not in the mid/high six-second range, unless you keep your foot on the brake pedal or parking brake jacked up while accelerating......
3rd gen Type-S 5AT = 5.9 ~ 6.0 sec 0-60
3rd gen Type-S 6MT = 5.5 sec 0-60
3rd gen Regular TL 6MT = 5.7 sec 0-60
In order for an '09 TL SH-AWD to be 0.3 sec quicker than the Type-S means it's gonna need 5.2 sec..... lol.
.
3rd gen Type-S 5AT = 5.9 ~ 6.0 sec 0-60
3rd gen Type-S 6MT = 5.5 sec 0-60
3rd gen Regular TL 6MT = 5.7 sec 0-60
In order for an '09 TL SH-AWD to be 0.3 sec quicker than the Type-S means it's gonna need 5.2 sec..... lol.
.
08-10-2008, 10:35 PM
#4434
I drive a Subata.
iTrader: (1)
Originally Posted by Manual Transmission
Behave, JS + TL boy. You are noob here. Just sit down...
.
.
JS + TL
Join Date: April 2005
Manual Transmission
Join Date: January 2008
Talk about noob
You are CLOWN. That's it.
08-10-2008, 10:38 PM
#4436
I drive a Subata.
iTrader: (1)
^ Yes. Frankly, other than some of the styling failures, this TL sounds promising.
08-10-2008, 10:41 PM
#4437
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2008
Age: 48
Posts: 632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by JS + TL
Different magazines generate different results for different vehicles.
Find out how much this car will weigh. And with its old 5AT platform it's not gonna be good. The AWD usually benefits in the low range, so 0-60 may not get too bad, but beyond that, it'll suffer due to extra weight and power loss in the drivetrain.
lolz.
08-10-2008, 10:50 PM
#4438
I drive a Subata.
iTrader: (1)
The article states that "despite the extra power, the TL SH-AWD doesn't feel much quicker than the standard TL. Sure, there's an extra 25 hp on board, but there's also another 200 pounds of weight too."
I know that. You don't even have to explain those kinds of basic shits to me.
"lolz"
I know that. You don't even have to explain those kinds of basic shits to me.
"lolz"
08-11-2008, 01:46 AM
#4439
You'll Never Walk Alone
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Age: 37
Posts: 9,521
Received 846 Likes
on
526 Posts
Manual Transmission, I'm not trying to be an @$$ here but according to the article, this is what it says,
"The TL is almost as heavy as an RL, as a loaded TL SH-AWD tips the scales at 3,986 pounds."
So don't worry, it's not over 4000lbs yet, it's still lighter than the CTS RWD!
Also, edmunds' performance numbers tend to be slower than other mags. For example, for the Accord V6 6MT, they got 14.6@101.6mph, in motortrend, they got 14@102.5mph. The reasons are that Edmunds does not use correction factor to account in weather condition etc. It also does not abuse the car when it comes to acceleration testing. As a result, they got 6+ seconds in previous TL's.
"The TL is almost as heavy as an RL, as a loaded TL SH-AWD tips the scales at 3,986 pounds."
So don't worry, it's not over 4000lbs yet, it's still lighter than the CTS RWD!
Also, edmunds' performance numbers tend to be slower than other mags. For example, for the Accord V6 6MT, they got 14.6@101.6mph, in motortrend, they got 14@102.5mph. The reasons are that Edmunds does not use correction factor to account in weather condition etc. It also does not abuse the car when it comes to acceleration testing. As a result, they got 6+ seconds in previous TL's.
08-11-2008, 02:28 AM
#4440
Originally Posted by JS + TL
The article states that "despite the extra power, the TL SH-AWD doesn't feel much quicker than the standard TL. Sure, there's an extra 25 hp on board, but there's also another 200 pounds of weight too."
I know that. You don't even have to explain those kinds of basic shits to me.
"lolz"
I know that. You don't even have to explain those kinds of basic shits to me.
"lolz"
