that trunk is the ugliest i've ever seen on a 4 dr sedan.

 

Without 300+hp V6, without RWD, the TL-S is still able to beat its main competitors on a race track by a skilled professional driver.

Wouldn't 300+hp and RWD make the future TL-S much easier to run away from it's main competitors when driven on public roads by an average driver ?

 

I think there are two different scenarios for an average driver with a 300+hp RWD car:

1.) He/she cannot distinguish the differences between FWD and RWD because he/she cannot reach the limit of the car.

2.) Assuming he/she reaches the limit of the car, for the FWD, most likely it will understeer, and most average drivers react by letting go of the gas pedal, and regain control; for RWD though..with 300+hp on tap (of course this would assume stability system to be turned off, otherwise what's the point of this FWD vs RWD comparison?), at the limit, the car would start to oversteer, the average driver doesn't know what to do, or reacts too slowly to countersteer, and the car continues to oversteer, until the car faces the opposite direction. By the way, this happened to one of my friends who was driving his brother's SR20DETT powered S14 in the rain while turning left NORMALLY.

So, IMO, I think a FWD or AWD car would have a much easier time to run away.

Btw, by public roads, I assumed twisty roads are included.

 

This is for the average drivers, so the stability control or VSA must be on. They don't red-line the engine in every gear as the guys driving on the race track. They don't dare or don't have the skills to drive their cars to the limits, especially on twisty roads. So these average drivers need a lot more engine power to out accelerate the others.

So it all boils down to this. If a skilled driver can beat others when driving real hard a sub-300hp FWD car, an average unskilled driver can only outrun others when driving with ease a 300+hp FWD car.

The only problem is 300+hp and FWD don't mix well with good handling characteristics. So instead of going the heavy and power robbing AWD route, the 300+hp car has to be RWD.

So with let say 350hp RWD and wide-ass rear tires, the average unskilled drivers can smoke the others with ease, without having to red-line the engine, and without having to push the car to the handling limits.

In essence, the average unskilled drivers are using the hp advantage to compensate for their mediocre driving skills to beat others, without having to drive their cars real hard as for the skilled drivers. People only complain about not having enough power for their cars, they hardly complain about having too much power.

 

Maybe it will get a BluRay-A to succeed the 3G's DVD-A.

 

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

 

i'm like the car until it gets to the trunk. it looks too busy, as mentioned before.

i think the current TL has one of the best looking rears.

 

I think you and I both have valid points. As you can see from the racing and competition section, you see people in their TL-S beating other more powerful competitors, on the straight, and on the twisties. On the other hand, you can also find stories that tell you the opposite. AWD, IMO would be the easiest, and it will be even more beneficial when traction is limited. People still street race when it's raining...believe it or not...and the GTR, from R32 to R35, Lan Evo, and STi have shown as what a AWD car should be like.

anyways...I don't think this argument will get us anywhere..really..lol...

 

TSX>TL-s on the twisties
on the highway it's a much different story
but anything other than FWD will be better

 

im sorri but its ugly!

 

Eh thats not what the TL is about. The TL is about luxury at a value price. I wouldn't understand why Acura would put a V8 in a TL. Maybe like an RL-S. But in a TL why? I mean does BMW, Audi, MB. Put V8s in their sub-compact entry level sedans. Other than the racing series. I think the TL is fine in fact I'm starting to like how it looks I just wished it got better gas mileage.

 

I don't know about ugly, I don't think it looks that bad, but it does look big and heavy... Wouldn't suprise me if this thing is up in the 3800 lbs range (since the current model is 3600).

 

Not anymore... $38K doesn't scream value to me, and adding the price for AWD and more HP is going to just close the gap between the TL and competition (335, G37) even more...

 

The reason why people want V8 in the TL is that they want MORE power, and Acura, up to this moment, seems to hit the brick wall producing V6 engines with way more than 300hp and lots of torque.

So before we see a say 350hp forced-induction V6 from Acura, people will continue to scream for a V8 powerplant from Acura.

 

there's no reason for the TL to have a V8 option..RL mayb but not the TL...what car in this class has optional V8? put a decently powered V6 in the TL and it should be good enough

 

Thats actually the opposite of what people want. Thats what gear heads and magazines want, not the average person. With gas steadily rising to $5.00/g, the last thing "people" want is a V8.

 

A V8 in a car within this segment is pretty much relegated to the likes of the RS4/S4, IS-F, M3 and C63, all of which are limited production specialty models. Specifically, the TL resides in a 6-cylinder segment and the upcoming powertrain sounds more than sufficient to me.

 

Exactly. Even Audi is changing its strategy by adopting a supercharged 6-cylinder engine instead of the previous V8 to cut fuel consumption and emission level while maintaining decent power output.

 

I don't know who the manufacturers think they are fooling. My friends with stock Evos and STis get very similar or even worse mileage than I do. And we ALL flog the crap out of our cars.

I guess what most people see is "V6 vs. V8" and "I4 vs V6" and instantly think they're going to get better mileage with fewer cylinders. When you throw forced induction into the equation, that couldn't be more inaccurate.

Audi is going to supercharge a V6, supposedly in the name of efficiency? Chances are, it will be a positive displacement s/c and will get max boost from pretty low RPMs, and going into boost usually correlates to the fuel economy of a car going to shit. It'll be interesting to see the EPA numbers of their s/c V6....

When you directly compare the same model, one with a V6 vs a V8, the V6 model will generally weigh a little less, and have a bit less power. Now add a forced induction system onto that V6, and you tack on a few dozen extra pounds, gain some more power, but at the same time to add increased complexity and cost, plus given the extra heat & strain on the engine generated by the extra components, you also decrease reliability.

I guess you do add the edge of increased marketability.... although the general public don't know the difference from a supercharger and a turbo, those that have the slightest clue know that it makes your car faster. Since its a turbo V6 compared to last model's V8, it must be faster and use less gas! :silvercup

The closest example I can use is the Lexus GS using specs right off of their website. Lexus GS350 (3.5 V6 with direct injection) vs the GS460 (4.6 V8, no direct injection) I included direct injection because Toyota has had success with it... usually their DI engines produce more power with improved economy at the same time than their non-DI variants. See the comparison between the heavier, DI-V8 LS460 vs. the lighter, non-DI V8 GS460.

Those EPA numbers are pretty close considering that the GS460 weighs 150 lbs more and makes more power. Add a turbo to the GS350 and I can pretty much guarantee you that with all the plumbing, hoses/lines for cooling, the turbo, intercooler, etc. and the weight will be nearly the same, the power will probably increase to a bit more than what the GS460 has (or will be about the same), yet it won't have as broad of a power curve on the dyno as the V8 even with the variable flow turbos they're using these days. And think again if you think the V6 will get improved fuel economy with a turbocharger on it. It's likely to shrink to the GS460's numbers or even worse.

And read carefully now.... imagine if they used the direct-injection V8 from the LS460 in the GS460. The GS460 would then have 380 hp, 367 lb/ft of torque. And get this.... the LS460 weighs 4,244 lbs, has the same transmission (even the same final drive), yet gets VERY similar EPA numbers of 16/24 vs 17/24 for the 300 lbs lighter, non-DI GS460.



So, cliff notes....

ACURA NEEDS TO LEARN HOW TO UTILIZE DIRECT INJECTION PROPERLY. Turbocharged cars are fun to drive, but its more difficult to extract good fuel economy out of them. Apparently these days all "people" care about is fuel economy, not driving fun.

Next thing you know, "people" will start demanding a turbocharged 4-cyl in the TL

 

I see where you are coming from, but I'd like to add a few things.

First, Evo and STi aren't made to be fuel efficient. Also, not sure about the newer Evo X with its new 4B11, but the 4G63 in older Evo's and the EJ20/EJ25 are old designs, from the early 1990's I believe, obviously they can't compete with today's newer engines in terms of fuel efficiency. In fact, old GT-Rs, Supras, RX-7 got discontinued because of their emission level, and they all have one thing in common, turbo. However, another common thing between these are they are all sports cars, made to go fast, rather than being fuel efficient.

Volkswagen is good with using turbo to improve power and maintaining great fuel efficiency. One can argue they are better at making FI engines than NA engines. Their 1.4L engine can make 170hp and this is important, 177lbft from 1750-4500rpm by using a twincharger design. In other words, the power band is even better than some good diesel engines. Without the twincharger, this engine would be making 90hp. Compared other NA engines with similar output, this engine is 20% more fuel efficient. And compared with VW's less powerful 2.0 FSI engine, this 1.4L TSI gets 39.2mpg, vs 36.2mpg of the 2.0 FSI. There are various tunes of this 1.4TSi engine too, one is a 122hp version that gets 44+mpg.

I agree though, Honda/Acura needs to learn how to use DI properly. They tried it once on the stream, it wasn't successful. But I think it's time to take a look at that idea again.

I think the key to improve power while maintaining good efficiency is use small displacement with a small turbo. That's the newest trend in Europe by the way.

 

Nobody wants a V8 as the single engine choice for the TL. Keep the low output V6 as the base engine, and make available either a high output (300+hp) V6 or a (300+hp) V8 as the top end option, just like all other TRUE luxury car makers.

Successful luxury car makers always make available various engine choices to capture a wide range of car buyers. Having a single engine choice will severely limit the appeal to only one single group of buyers. Even better is a high-performance line with outrageous engine power such as S/RS from Audi, M from BMW, and AMG from MB, to boost brand and model images.

This is all about engine power. V8 is only necessary if Honda is unable to tune the V6 for lot's of power as it is the situation now.

 

I believe that's what they are doing, other than the 280hp base V6, they are also making a 300+hp V6 for the TL.

The successful luxury car makers that you mentioned are all from Europe. Why? They dedicate all that money and effort into making luxury cars! Now you say, Lexus has the "F" line too, well it just happened recently, and Toyota as we all know, is a MUCH MUCH bigger company than Honda. Even Infiniti AT THIS MOMENT does not have something similar to the S/RS, AMG, M, or F, even though I won't be surprised if Infiniti will get something similar soon as afterall, Nissan has been around as long as Toyota and similar in size too. If anything, I'd expect Infiniti to get a ultra-high performance line first before Acura does. Again, size matters IMO. In fact, I'm impressed by Honda's ability to have a separate brand, not many companies of that size can do that..I can't think of any right now.

Not sure about Honda not being able to tune a V6, as 20 years ago it was already able to make a 3L 280ps engine. It's more like they have gotten lazy and not doing what they are supposed to do.

 

If engineered properly, a V8 powerplant doesn't necessary return bad gas mileage. Cylinder deactivation technology is already available to let a car run on half the total number of cylinders. 7 or 8 speed gear box can have super overdrive gear ratio for highway cruising.

Yes, V8 is not for the average person. It is, in most case, not the base engine, but an available top-end option from TRUE luxury auto makers for the exclusive bunch of wealthy people who even consider $10/gallon gas as nothing.

 

nissan/infiniti were all about power and even they dont have a V8 option for the G....why should the TL?
Infiniti G, Lexus ES....neither has v8 option...acura needs to focus on the RL's powerplant rather than the TL...acura currently has a 3.5 and 3.7 V6, both of which are capable of putting plenty of power for the TL

 

This is good, but how about a lightweight 2WD 300+hp TL rather than a heavy-ass, power-robbing and fuel-economy-UNfriendly AWD 300+hp TL please.

 

Taking that engineering into a V6, it will return even better fuel economy, don't you think so? Cylinder deactivation technology is available, but as far as i know, in the real world, they don't save you a lot of gas, even Chrysler only claims 10-15% saving, and we all know car makers like to exaggerate things a bit.

I don't know, my friend has a M45 and he thinks the gas is ridiculously expensive too, for a much cheaper car like the TL, I'm pretty sure most drivers that drive a car in that class would think gas right not is already too expensive.

 

The Acura brand has no luxury car image, Infiniti and Lexus have. Having the highest power is it's class is always a shortcut to boost brand image. That's why Honda is always trying to match the Accord with the class-pioneering engine output from the Altima. This shows how important engine power is even for economy brands.

Honda/Acura is always good in doing something no other auto makers have done before.

The new G37 will have a 330hp V6 driving 2 wheels. The new high-power TL will have a lesser-powered 3.7L-V6 driving 4 wheels. Imagine if the AWD TL is to have a 350hp V8 or high-output V6 engine, and the car will be invincible.

 

Exactly, it's the RL that needs more cylinders, not the TL.

 

The current RL is rated at 19mpg combined, while the TL Type S 5AT is rated at 20mpg combined. The current TL-S 5AT is at 3600lbs, while the RL is at 4000lbs. The next TL will have less features, thus less weight than the RL, so, I'd say for the SH-AWD TL it would be around 3800lbs. That would mean a TL SH-AWD would return about 19.5mpg assuming Honda is not improving on fuel economy on the car. I don't think a difference of 0.5mpg is a big deal.

 

yet you have to remember MPG isn't everything, the old RL does 0-60 in 6.7 seconds while the TL does it in almost 5.6....

 

People who buy RLs dont really care about speed as much as people who buy TLs.

 

To be fair C&D obtained 6.3s for 0-60, and 1/4 mile in 14.8@95mph, these numbers are pretty much the same as a 2nd gen TL-S and a 3rd gen TL 5AT. The 5.6s you mentioned is for the TL 6MT A-spec model, and the 6MT model is much faster than the 5AT TL. I would say most of the added power (30-40hp more than a 2nd gen TL-S/3rd gen TL 5AT), is used to compensate for the extra 500lbs-600lbs, rather than powering the SH-AWD system, there's certainly some loss there though.

 

I see NO value any more. Back when i got mine 28k was good value and A Lot of car for the $ 10k to 12k more now, id look elsewhere.

 

I think they should make the navigation system as an option for the TL-S. That would take $3k off the sticker price at $35000, instead of $38000.

 

I think they should just lower the sticker price, the TL-S is 35K at invoice, 36.5 would be good MSRP, and honda can afford to do that since they offered over 3K cash-back on the TL a while ago and it was possible to get the for 31.5 plus tax...

 

I heard many people are getting TL-S at very low prices recently, I heard a few people getting them at 34-35k.

 

true...i was offered $28k for a base TL...$30-31k w/navi...$34k for TypeS

which are killer deals, IMO

 

^^Well duh, they gotta make space for the '09s!

 

Yup, exactly! Also from what I've heard from TOV Acura has stopped production of the 08 TL's for a while now and instead they are building more accords, but seems like they are still short on supply....

 

For even 40k loaded, I'd say that a TL with SH-AWD and 310hp would be a good deal.

Just go to BMW online and configure up a 335xi to TL specs and your looking at close to 50k