Don't forget the sides and rear.

 

Have you read that they are making entire aeroplane structure in house.
You dont do this kind of investment for one project but leverage it across the industries.
Japanese are very good in lowering the price through mass production. It is Toray/Kawasaki/Mitsubishi that are the largest supplier to Boeing, MB etc.
4G TL is pig? show me any other car that is 195inch long, 74.4 inch wide, 57inch high, standard AWD, ACE body structure, 19inch standard tires and still weighs 3950lbs with Auto & pull 0.92g?.
Look at BMW 5 RWD weight with newer lighter 8speed.
Even MDX weight with newer 6speed auto, 255/19 didnot incrase.

 

That's the definition of a pig. It's bigger then the 5 series, E, A6, etc. It's as large as your "flagship" RL.

The car is a great performer, but it's too big. It was unnecessary to increase the length of the 4G by that much with minimal interior space increases or trunk space for that matter.

 

 

I loved my 3g. It had its shortcomings though. The biggest was probably it being fwd and rotors that warped with the quickness. I have zero need for AWD or a much larger car, both of which the 4g TL is. Plus, I cannot stand the beak, while it is tolerable as I see one driving around, I could not imagine myself walking up to the car every morning and be pleased with its looks especially if I'm paying 40k for it, (I would do an RJ grille, but it makes no sense to spend almost a $1,000 to make the car bearable IMO). The car should look good from the factory. You should never buy a car you're not happy with. It's a lot of money to regret spending.

My G is a tad smaller then my 3G TL. The styling is MUCH easier on the eyes then the 4g. The 6MT SH-AWD is very much a driver's car. My G37S fits my needs and wants (4 doors, rwd, sporty, etc). I don't magazine race especially against other forum members, it's very unlikely I will take it to a track, but I do drive spiritedly and it's taking what I throw at it with a smile. Most of the Gs I come across are coupes (some sedans, but once in a blue moon an S) unlike the 3g in which I saw maybe 4 a day on my morning commute?

So Acura missed a sale which is sad because I've had an Integra GS-R, RSX-S, 3G TL... I'm a fan of the brand, but they didn't move in the direction I was hoping. Maybe I'll be back for the MMC 5g or I'll stick with my Nissan, we'll see. Infiniti put out a car that I wanted and was willing to spend money on.

I don't feel like a winner or race car driver because it's RWD or "high torque" nor do I want to come off that way. I just enjoy my car for myself.

 

You're suggesting that by participating in the aerospace industry, Honda will be able to incorporate materials like titanium into their production cars.

Let's look at Mitsubishi. You say they're already a significant supplier to the aerospace industry. However, even they are unable to introduce extensively, exotic materials into their cars. Only the highest-trim Lancer Evos ever saw titanium alloy, and it was present only as the turbine wheel in their turbos.

What makes you think Honda will be able to make these materials cheap when Mitsubishi has been in the industry for a number of years, and Honda has only very recently participated?

Your argument about the 4G being lighter than its competitors despite its size is irrelevant. My point is that it is very difficult for auto manufacturers to use liberal amounts of lightweight materials in their cars without making them expensive.

 

Mitsubishis introduced Pajero (Montero SUV) two decades ahead of Honda and look what happened to it. No money left to radically update.
You dont know fully Mitsubishi (MHI) Corporate History. it is loss making enteriprize since 1990s.
Only thing it made was Japan defence Ministry F-2. (It is F-16 clone but with extensive composite and titanium). and now supplying to Boeing. and is creating its own region jet with extensive CFRP called MRJ and that with loans and Japanese government funding.
Boeing 787 is 50% by weight made of CFRP. and each 787 has 20tons of titanium alloys.the same is true for Airbus A350.
compare those with B777 of circa 1995. World has moved on and your living in past. These things were not possible before 21st century on large commercial scale.

think harder some thing is under development for 20 years and it is not flying. It is not about aeroplane but mastering new material technologies.




Honda has strong corporate history of making Billions per year. Honda is second largest R&D spender next to Toyota with one third product lineup.
so most of its money is for exotic research projects not just cheap cars for third world. What Honda can deliver on mass scales and still make profit on them. Mitsubishi cant do it. Mitsubishi can only be tier-1 supplier not the end product. It does not have that corporate leadership and culture to do it. Infact Mitsubishi hasnt seen how a $10B profit in a year look like let alone doing it for decades continously. they are too poor and too spread out on other industrial sectors to fully concentrate on Auto-Jet business.
Honda has that finess and laser sharp focus on end products. They can afford to pay the best salaries, hire the most experianced staff and can incorporate these light weight materials on much wider scale. Honda can be supplier to other Auto makers. infact you can see SH-AWD technology has been implemented very cheaply across the line up. You get this technology on in S4 and X6.

 

OK, except technological advancements aren't the only factor here. Even if Honda develops new and better methods of creating metal alloys, it certainly doesn't guarantee that they'll continue to get cheaper. Realize that metals like titanium are expensive because they exist in small quantities, and are subject to price fluctuations. You seem to be suggesting that Boeing's 787 uses more titanium because technology has made this alloy cheaper.

Explain to me then why gasoline prices have risen considerably in the last 10 years. Surely new technologies have made refining oil more efficient.

 

blah blah with the blah blah.... still doesn't help Acura's exterior design and overall lack of direction and marketing strategy.

 

logic and ssftsx are mutually exclusive bro. he makes a work day go by faster. Now I'm just up so I got nothing better to do then entertain myself and watch the bullshit spew from his posts.

 

Agreed. I think I went a little too off-topic there.

What I don't understand is, why didn't Honda/Acura simply make the 4G TL look like an evolution of the 3G? Many people agreed the 3G was an attractive car, so if all they wanted to do was give their cars a distinctive styling cue, they only had to slap that ugly grille onto every one of their cars and call it a day. In case the design was unpopular, at least the rest of the car would look good. Instead they decided to drastically re-design the entire car. Even though they've realized many people don't like the styling, there's little they can do short of a complete overhaul.

On the other hand, I've grown to quite like the look of the 2G TSX.

 

there is no new refinery built in US for long time. only refurbishment. and Oil has alot more enviromental regulation and transportation charges.
every mineral is finite. even iron ore prices are rising. Does it mean people should stop using steel?

I only say Honda corporate cultural will allow it be better than most firms in commericalizing light weight materials on mass scale.

 

Yes if you want a minijet we all agree buy a Honda. If you want a luxury SUV SSFTSX wants you to buy a Q5 https://acurazine.com/forums/showpos...4&postcount=27 and not his beloved Acura.

 

I dunno man I'm sure you have more then a few managers at Acura on the retail side (their dealerships) and at the corporate level asking those same questions almost two years after its introduction. It has such a long front overhang, odd beak, and seems "big bodied." It's like the 3G was Anna Nicole Smith from her Playboy debut and the 4G was her later years...

Like I said the car is a great performer, but if I'm going to spend that much coin on a car I better like the way it looks and not just be "okay" with it.

The 2G TSX isn't bad at all. I'd take a V6 over the FWD TL. Living in Cali, I don't need AWD or a huge ass car. I just wanted something similar in size to my 3G, but much more sportier. Acura didn't have it.

 

That's because the TSX is proportionately correct and easy on the eye. The TL is a proportionate disaster. The beak is tolerable on the TSX because if it's relative proportion. On the TL? Not so much.

 

The 4g is that one kinda bootsy chick you're messing with on the side you don't want your buddies to know about, but you're having a ton of fun doing....

 

lmao

 

This was one reason I almost didn't buy the TL. It is sorta too big for my commuting needs. If Acura had put the RDX powertrain in the TSX with a 6MT, I would have been all over it, but really wanted a 6MT again, which is why a lot of cars I would normally have considered got crossed off the list.

This has been discussed before, but I think many would agree. Acura should have put the J in the RDX and the RDX Turbo in the TSX.

Power plenums aside (I still feel ridiculous even saying the term), Acura's SoCal designers are probably already hard at work to rectify their past misdeeds. Don't fret jilted lovers - Honda will be back...someday. Or not. Until then, enjoy the ugly discounts.

 

The 6MT completely transforms the car. It drives much smaller then it actually is. The size gets masked by how agile and responsive the car becomes by actually putting the driver in control. I just have no need for a car that big. Put that engine/drivetrain combo in the 2G TSX like you said, and now you're talking.

My only backseat passenger is my dog. If it wasn't for him you'd probably see me in a leased S5.

 

Problem now with that turbo I4 is, its fuel economy sucks. Acura needs to match or do better on its fuel economy compared to the new Hyundai turbo I4 going into the Sonata.

The biggest thing that can help Acura is getting some sort of revolutionary technology into their models that no one else has or comes close to that gives them a distinct advantage. Problem is we have seen no signs of this yet. They need to do that first and then focus on their status, market shift, etc.

 

They need to first focus on their styling mishaps. I have a feeling the rest can fall into place eventually.

 

The turbo K-Series just needs to be re-engineered. Good economy isn't that far off.

 

IMO They need a NEW V6 first. Also make it capable of boost. A smaller displacement V6 with single or TT could be capable of great mileage and great power.

 

Serious question - How much ground clearance does the Honda Jet have?

 

^
About 35,000 feet.

 

Damn what would SSFTSX do with all of that ground clearance? That makes it the most luxurious transportation in the world.

What of its side mirrors?

 

More importantly, does it have door latches?

 

RDX fuel economy sucks?. It is AWD 3900 lb 65" tall/ 73inch wide vehicle with 5speed.
look at the performance improvement at 40k mile. It is faster than MDX/ZDX and it got 20mpg combined. and that without 6speed auto.
subtract 1 second time for 6speed auto or 6MT and ur RDX becomes 21st century Acura NSX.
http://www.caranddriver.com/var/ezfl...4d153a9672.pdf

I would say FWD lighter and lower TSX with will get closer to 25mpg combined with better performance than V6. there is some thing about turbo torque from Honda.

 

The Q5 gets 20 mpg from its 3.2L V6 and is nearly 4200 lbs.

 

It has 6speed auto. Just change 6speed from 5speed in RDX like MDX and you get fasted production CUV if not already.

 

Ok. Exactly how many times were you dropped on the head as an infant?

 

Agree. Five years ago, the Acura V6 was already falling way behind it's competitors in terms of technology and engine output. A shame to the ex-"best engine builder in the world".

If Honda insists on keeping the V8 program dead, it should work on a new V6 powerplant capable of producing V8-like power output, as well as great mileage which again WAS why Honda had been famous for.

 

 

Where do you come up with this what if shit? Add another cog to the transmission and the CUV competes with a purpose built sports car for the 21st century oh and you can fit your dog and wife in there too!

The RDX will soon be a Porsche 911 turbo slayer. Wanna know why? Ground clearance and side mirrors. People are going to see the Acura badge and immediately know they are dealing with a high performance machine.

My 21st century NSX will take out sports cars, SUVs and if they add sliding rear doors it'll put a Sienna to shame. What can't it do, a car err CUV that can do everything? Oh just sell in the numbers Acura hoped for..................

Post #2000 dedicated to putting SSFTSX in his place.

 

Acura needs to do something with the fuel economy. I mean you mean to tell me Hyundai is more inventive/innovative then Acura is ??

 

LoL they're headed that way. HondAcura needs to curb the tide.

 

Ok but how do you explain the cheap dash material on the RDX?

 

I never said RDX is upmarket vehicle. It needs to go upmarket in design, interior and 6speed Auto. It is on sale since August 2006. so it is 5 year old already.
In FWD RDX C&D test it achieved 136mph top speed and 21mpg fuel economy.
It does no suck in fuel economy when you look at performance numbers a for tall wide vehicle that is heavier than TSX-V6. Tires are also tall 235/55/18. Most of its competitors have 6speed.

Most harhsest critics said its turbo engine is the best from its sound and boost.

 

You said if only it had a 6 sp it would be a "21st century Acura NSX".

 

Feeling of speed and handling in tall SUV is completely different than coupe sitting to the ground. I will take any SUV that goes under 6 second over any coupe under 5 second for 0-60.