Acura: TLX News
05-27-2014, 09:27 PM
#9361
Instructor
If turbo engines can truly offer the benefits they are supposed to offer - more power with better fuel economy in a smaller package, without the bugs of old turbos, then there shouldn't be any reason to not go that route. It doesn't make sense that manufacturers would be reluctant to adopt turbos for no reason, especially in this day when everyone's chasing MPGs. That not everyone has adopted turbos yet tells me there is still a barrier, whatever that barrier is.
05-28-2014, 12:32 AM
#9362
It seems like there are two schools of thought:
1. Japan. Naturally aspirated engines. Period. Nissan, Honda, Toyota, and Mazda are all trying to get as much mileage out of NA four-bangers as they can.
2. Everyone but GM. Varying displacement and force-induction engines including turbo/supercharger forced induction.
3. GM. Picking and choosing but not really consistently applying a technology and sticking to it.
Who is right? I think that's difficult to say. But I am going to bet that at some point the Japanese with their 3.7L V6s are going to be the dinosaurs if they don't start changing.
1. Japan. Naturally aspirated engines. Period. Nissan, Honda, Toyota, and Mazda are all trying to get as much mileage out of NA four-bangers as they can.
2. Everyone but GM. Varying displacement and force-induction engines including turbo/supercharger forced induction.
3. GM. Picking and choosing but not really consistently applying a technology and sticking to it.
Who is right? I think that's difficult to say. But I am going to bet that at some point the Japanese with their 3.7L V6s are going to be the dinosaurs if they don't start changing.
05-28-2014, 02:35 AM
#9363
If power were the only issue, I would agree with you, but the torque in each engine is not the same.
My 2008 A4 had a 2.0T with like 200 hp and 200 lb-ft of torque. My 2013 TSX has a 2.4L with 200 hp-ish but only 170 lb-ft of torque. The 2.0T was quite a bit louder than the 2.4 but the torque difference was also noticeable. So no, they're not exactly redundant, but I see your point.
My 2008 A4 had a 2.0T with like 200 hp and 200 lb-ft of torque. My 2013 TSX has a 2.4L with 200 hp-ish but only 170 lb-ft of torque. The 2.0T was quite a bit louder than the 2.4 but the torque difference was also noticeable. So no, they're not exactly redundant, but I see your point.
for the TLX I believe the better option is however a no turbo base engine V6, diesel or not. It's too big and too heavy, like the Audi A6, for a high rev small engine like the 2.0t option...
If Acura don't want V8 more powerful engines, they could slam a compressor or turbo on a 3.0l engine and get from 300 to 420 hp, without loosing much fuel economy.
The following users liked this post:
kurtatx (05-29-2014)
05-28-2014, 08:36 AM
#9364
2024 Honda Civic Type R
for the TLX I believe the better option is however a no turbo base engine V6, diesel or not. It's too big and too heavy, like the Audi A6, for a high rev small engine like the 2.0t option...
If Acura don't want V8 more powerful engines, they could slam a compressor or turbo on a 3.0l engine and get from 300 to 420 hp, without loosing much fuel economy.
If Acura don't want V8 more powerful engines, they could slam a compressor or turbo on a 3.0l engine and get from 300 to 420 hp, without loosing much fuel economy.
I don't agree. Small displacement turbocharged engines are not "high rev small engine". My 2.0T makes peak torque at 1800RPM. I don't have to rev it high at all for any kind of substantial power.
How does your 3.0T A6 feel?
In fact, a lineup like the new Mustang would be very nice for the TLX. "Base" V6, turbocharged four-cylinder, and "upgraded" V6 (since I doubt we'd see a V8 from Honda).
V6T for a "TLX Type-S" would be fantastic.
Last edited by RPhilMan1; 05-28-2014 at 08:38 AM.
The following users liked this post:
kurtatx (05-29-2014)
05-28-2014, 08:37 AM
#9365
Moderator
It seems like there are two schools of thought:
1. Japan. Naturally aspirated engines. Period. Nissan, Honda, Toyota, and Mazda are all trying to get as much mileage out of NA four-bangers as they can.
2. Everyone but GM. Varying displacement and force-induction engines including turbo/supercharger forced induction.
3. GM. Picking and choosing but not really consistently applying a technology and sticking to it.
Who is right? I think that's difficult to say. But I am going to bet that at some point the Japanese with their 3.7L V6s are going to be the dinosaurs if they don't start changing.
1. Japan. Naturally aspirated engines. Period. Nissan, Honda, Toyota, and Mazda are all trying to get as much mileage out of NA four-bangers as they can.
2. Everyone but GM. Varying displacement and force-induction engines including turbo/supercharger forced induction.
3. GM. Picking and choosing but not really consistently applying a technology and sticking to it.
Who is right? I think that's difficult to say. But I am going to bet that at some point the Japanese with their 3.7L V6s are going to be the dinosaurs if they don't start changing.
05-29-2014, 08:13 AM
#9366
Senior Moderator
*losing
I don't agree. Small displacement turbocharged engines are not "high rev small engine". My 2.0T makes peak torque at 1800RPM. I don't have to rev it high at all for any kind of substantial power.
How does your 3.0T A6 feel?
In fact, a lineup like the new Mustang would be very nice for the TLX. "Base" V6, turbocharged four-cylinder, and "upgraded" twin turbocharged V6 (since I doubt we'd see a V8 from Honda).
V6T for a "TLX Type-S" would be fantastic.
I don't agree. Small displacement turbocharged engines are not "high rev small engine". My 2.0T makes peak torque at 1800RPM. I don't have to rev it high at all for any kind of substantial power.
How does your 3.0T A6 feel?
In fact, a lineup like the new Mustang would be very nice for the TLX. "Base" V6, turbocharged four-cylinder, and "upgraded" twin turbocharged V6 (since I doubt we'd see a V8 from Honda).
V6T for a "TLX Type-S" would be fantastic.
05-29-2014, 08:46 AM
#9367
Azine Jabroni
I think we can all agree on this. I doubt Honda (or new Acura or whatever) is interested in engineering a new V8 if they can turbo their current lineup (which evidence suggests they are actively doing).
Of course, 3 or 4 years down the line, we'll probably look back at this discussion and laugh.
Of course, 3 or 4 years down the line, we'll probably look back at this discussion and laugh.
05-29-2014, 08:05 PM
#9368
It is just the way the market is moving forward or "advancing" if you will, and eventually all the Japanese brand including Honda/Acura will give in. I suspect that Nissan/Infiniti will be the first one to do it since they already have the blue print of a proven V6 TT on file.
Looks like that's about to change with Lexus' IS 200t.
05-29-2014, 09:04 PM
#9369
Currently Post-Acura
I think we can all agree on this. I doubt Honda (or new Acura or whatever) is interested in engineering a new V8 if they can turbo their current lineup (which evidence suggests they are actively doing). Of course, 3 or 4 years down the line, we'll probably look back at this discussion and laugh.
The following users liked this post:
kurtatx (05-29-2014)
05-29-2014, 09:26 PM
#9370
Azine Jabroni
The following users liked this post:
Mugen.Justice (05-31-2014)
06-01-2014, 06:44 PM
#9373
אני עומד עם ישראל
^ cost and space savings.
06-01-2014, 06:51 PM
#9374
Senior Moderator
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Better Neighborhood, Arizona
Posts: 45,641
Received 2,329 Likes
on
1,309 Posts
06-01-2014, 07:25 PM
#9375
6G TLX-S
Is double-wishbone suspension better than strut suspension ?
06-02-2014, 07:52 AM
#9376
AZ Community Team
Yes, in general terms all things being equal. Better camber control over range of suspension travel.
Honda uses front DWB suspension first or the 1983 Prelude and adopted it to the Accord and finally Civic over time. The corresponding models for Acura also had it as well, including NSX. The SUV's and Ody never had it. Sad to see it slowly disappear from the Honda/Acura products in the last decade.
Honda uses front DWB suspension first or the 1983 Prelude and adopted it to the Accord and finally Civic over time. The corresponding models for Acura also had it as well, including NSX. The SUV's and Ody never had it. Sad to see it slowly disappear from the Honda/Acura products in the last decade.
06-02-2014, 05:35 PM
#9377
I feel the need...
That's because pretty much everyone here said they had it in the wrong platform mated to a crappy transmission. It should have been in the 2G TSX with a 6MT and super duper handling AWD.
06-03-2014, 02:50 AM
#9378
6G TLX-S
Yes, in general terms all things being equal. Better camber control over range of suspension travel.
Honda uses front DWB suspension first or the 1983 Prelude and adopted it to the Accord and finally Civic over time. The corresponding models for Acura also had it as well, including NSX. The SUV's and Ody never had it. Sad to see it slowly disappear from the Honda/Acura products in the last decade.
Honda uses front DWB suspension first or the 1983 Prelude and adopted it to the Accord and finally Civic over time. The corresponding models for Acura also had it as well, including NSX. The SUV's and Ody never had it. Sad to see it slowly disappear from the Honda/Acura products in the last decade.
06-03-2014, 12:23 PM
#9379
Team Owner
Isn't funny that Acura had the balls to "advance" once but somehow they still fucked up.
The following users liked this post:
RPhilMan1 (06-04-2014)
06-03-2014, 01:00 PM
#9380
I drive a Subata.
iTrader: (1)
Anything new?
06-03-2014, 06:48 PM
#9381
Team Owner
nope. nothing at all.
06-04-2014, 08:21 AM
#9382
Senior Moderator
Yea, this bland looking TLX was posted on instagram, appears to be a demo car given to the dealer
Why did acura have to drop the ball on the styling so badly
Why did acura have to drop the ball on the styling so badly
06-04-2014, 08:32 AM
#9383
)
06-04-2014, 09:21 AM
#9384
2024 Honda Civic Type R
The wheels look pretty bad, with atrocious wheel gap. Something looks off with the rear door handles. Too high or angled too much? And the trunk looks tiny from this angle.
The following users liked this post:
EL19 (06-05-2014)
06-04-2014, 09:46 AM
#9385
AZ Community Team
06-04-2014, 10:03 AM
#9386
AZ Community Team
Some manufactuers can work wonders with MacPherson struts. BMW used it for all 5 series (and other models) up to E60, but F10 went to a double wishbone design that looks like a copy of Honda's double wishbone with the high upper arm location.
06-04-2014, 11:46 AM
#9388
I drive a Subata.
iTrader: (1)
Why would anyone buy this over IS F sport / 3 Series?
I'm sure no Asian girls will buy this car.
Am I the only one who think those jewel eyes look really tacky? I saw them in person couple times when the new MDX was behind me. It's doesn't look luxurious at all compare to other cars in the same category.
06-04-2014, 11:55 AM
#9391
Team Owner
Like we said before. It is definitely "better" but "better" than what? you can't do much worse than 4G TL.
Overall it looks decent, actually better than what i thought. But still not the home run Acura was hoping for.
Overall it looks decent, actually better than what i thought. But still not the home run Acura was hoping for.
06-04-2014, 11:56 AM
#9392
Team Owner
Everytime i see a MDX on the road, the headlight reminds me of 
06-04-2014, 11:57 AM
#9393
I drive a Subata.
iTrader: (1)
Yeah..
Hopefully the car looks sharper in person.
Did Acura announce the new launching date?
Hopefully the car looks sharper in person.
Did Acura announce the new launching date?
06-04-2014, 02:29 PM
#9394
I'm Craig
iTrader: (2)
I don't know if it's the instagram filter, but the car looks really fat in that picture.
Why would anyone buy this over IS F sport / 3 Series?
I'm sure no Asian girls will buy this car.
Am I the only one who think those jewel eyes look really tacky? I saw them in person couple times when the new MDX was behind me. It's doesn't look luxurious at all compare to other cars in the same category.
Why would anyone buy this over IS F sport / 3 Series?
I'm sure no Asian girls will buy this car.
Am I the only one who think those jewel eyes look really tacky? I saw them in person couple times when the new MDX was behind me. It's doesn't look luxurious at all compare to other cars in the same category.
And the jewel eyes are ugly on the road. They make the headlights look like they have eyelashes.
06-04-2014, 02:35 PM
#9395
That TLX really looks like an ILX on steroids from the side. The longish hood caused by the front overhang is terrible. The overall car looks good though, except for some minor things, like the headlights and the overhang.
06-04-2014, 03:17 PM
#9396
A-TSX Oldie
+1 on the front overhang. Just makes the car look very unbalanced and front heavy, especially with the way the rear tapers off at certain angles.
Not too bothered by the jewel lights. As for Audi, is the square led box surrounding the Q5 headlights any better? I thought it was a cheap Kia knockoff the first time I saw their DRLs.
Not too bothered by the jewel lights. As for Audi, is the square led box surrounding the Q5 headlights any better? I thought it was a cheap Kia knockoff the first time I saw their DRLs.
The following users liked this post:
cairo333 (10-19-2019)
06-04-2014, 03:20 PM
#9397
Midnight Marauder
I've been saying that since day 1. It's so lazy. Yeah they're cool and light up the road, but Acura...have you seen what Audi has been doing with their lights?!
That TLX really looks like an ILX on steroids from the side. The longish hood caused by the front overhang is terrible. The overall car looks good though, except for some minor things, like the headlights and the overhang.
That TLX really looks like an ILX on steroids from the side. The longish hood caused by the front overhang is terrible. The overall car looks good though, except for some minor things, like the headlights and the overhang.
06-04-2014, 03:26 PM
#9398
A-TSX Oldie
Acura, you hear that? Less overhang, more success!
