Acura: TSX News
 

"Yes, for U.S. Sale: The U.S.-spec Acura TSX is not only as tight as the European and Japanese versions, it’s tighter"

http://www.autoweek.com/cat_print.mv...511&1914530282

The very first review, I believe.



Some factoids from the article:

Tested Vehicle: 2004 Acura TSX, 6-speed manual w/moonroof

Vehicle Weight: 3230lbs

Mass Balance: 60% front, 40% rear

Peak HP: 200hp @ 6800rpm

Peak Torque: 166lb-ft @ 4500rpm

0-60mph: 7.0 seconds (estimated)

Redline: 7100rpm

Tires: 215/50R17 Michelins

Aerodynamic Drag Coefficient: 0.27Cd

Pricing: $25,000-$30,000 (estimated)

(edited: added tidbits from R&T "First Drive" review on page 2.)

same crappy tires as the CLS!...

How about a type-S with the CLS Engine!

The best excertpt from the article....
"The TSX will slot between the RSX and the CL/TL in the Acura lineup. Acura says competition for the TSX will come from “premium sports sedans from Europe and Japan,” namely the Lexus IS 300, BMW 325, Mercedes C-Class, Audi A4, Volvo S40, WV Jetta and Passat, and the Nissan Altima. Altima and Jetta, sure, the TSX will give those a run for their lease agreements. But Acura’s been smoking crankcase oil if it thinks a front-driver, even one as well-engineered as this one, will compete against 325s and IS 300s; it won’t. Not in performance. In price, sure...."

I agree
 

I really don't see how this car will compete with the Lex or anything close... I think it would be a nice second car...like the RSX 4 dr, etc. They hyped this car as the Euro Accord, then they give us a differnt engine, etc....it sucks. IMHO

I think this car will compete very well with many of those mentioned, has anyone driven an A4 anyway ? Over 30K and you get beaten by mini vans off the line, and 37K for an IS300 that's slower and smaller ? This car will be big for Acura.

i think it should compete fine, the german cars are are just overpriced for what you get in that segment, no doubt i would take one over a 325. performance wise on the track it may not be able to keep up with a 30k is300 but i doubt too many buyers are going to be worried about that. i would have been happier with the accords v6 or more hp, or just a lower price on the base version and have the typeS at ~28k.

http://www.canadiandriver.com/testdrives/04tsx.htm

It probably won't compete in performance on the track (0-60 and Qtr mile will be competative)...but what it's going to compete more with is sales. I think Acura will sell plenty of them to compete with the 3 series sales. Case in point...it's snowing this morning in St. Paul...and within 2 blocks of my house I saw a RWD car spin out and a FWD car avoid hitting me because the drive tires caught the turn and pulled the car around. In this instance a RWD couldn't have done that. I wouldn't buy a TSX if it were RWD...and I know I'm not alone in this.

for a car as heavy as the TSX.....166 ft lbs is a JOKE!!! the TSX looks great, will be competitively priced, and is a tight little car but acura is cutting themselves off at the knees with such an anemic motor and no Type S.....

without a doubt, the TSX NEEDS the honda 3.0 motor in the accord as a Type S.....now THAT would sell....this TSX however is abysmally underpowered. 166 tq...come on, the thing weights 3300 lbs!!! the CL-S could use more torque and its already got 232 and only slightly heavier...let alone this....

The 325 (which is, as far as I can tell, the #1 car Acura is positioning this car to compete with) weighs 300lbs more and only has only 9lb-ft more on tap. Plus, the TSX has 16hp over the 325. So I think the TSX is right in line...meaning the Type S will be right up there with the 330.

The A4 1.8T weighs 100 - 250lbs more than the TSX and has the same amount of torque. Plus, the TSX has 30hp on the A4 1.8T.

So 166lb-ft is no joke...it's on par for the target market. However, if Acura does bring over the 3.0 240hp from the accord for the Type S, it will spank the 330 and A4 3.0. I think Acura is positioning themselves to raise the bar in the Sports Sedan market. w00t.

just because it compares well with other underpowered cars doesn't mean it has enough power, even the is300 is underpowered. we'll see what happens with the final price and when or if they are going to offer another version.

To you they are underpowered...not the general public. Not every car is going to have a 14sec qtr (or whatever). The base models of these sports sedans (the 325s, TSXs, 1.8Ts) aren't designed to set land speed records. They're supposed to be quick little sedans that handle well. And if that isn't quite enough, you move up to the faster models (the 330s, the Type Ss, the 3.0s) The TSX isn't trying to blow your socks off, it's trying to be competative with it's target market...and it seems to be doing a first rate job.

When it comes to engines, most consumers look at HP first (184 vs 170 vs 200...advantage -> TSX), next they look at cylinders (6 vs 4T vs 4...advantage -> 325), then I think they compare price to desired features (ADVANTAGE -> TSX). Very few consumers are interested in torque...or even know what it means.

A good deal of the people on this board seem to complain about everything being under powered...nothing's ever good enough for you. Well, get over it. What you want is not very economically sound. BMW makes more on the 325s than 330s, Audi makes more on the 1.8T than the 3.0 and most likely Acura will make more on the "Premium" than the Type S. The majority of car buyers don't care as much about those things as you do. If you don't think a stock car is fast enough, mod it. For everyone else, it's fast enough...it's powerful enough...it has enough torque. So I don't see what everyone is complaining about.

Not enough power / torque... Why did they put a inline four in the car anyway?

For 95% of the consumers in the market for a TSX...it's more than enough power, enough torque, enough economy to sell a good qty of them at profit...to satisfied customers.

i think the TSX can and will compete.... And RWD isn't everything for many people. if i was in the market for a TSX like car and it was RWD, i wouldn't buy it.

can't wait to hear 1sicklex's opinion :rolleyes:

press release
"The TSX is designed to compete head on with other premium sport sedans from Europe and Japan," said Dick Colliver, Acura executive vice president, sales. "With 200 horsepower, a 6-speed manual transmission, race-bred suspension and an abundance of features, the TSX has what it takes to be a success in this hotly contested segment."


a car designated as a 'sports sedan' should be able to move faster than a family sedan manufactured by the same company. gee i wonder why there is no manual in the v6 accord sedan, guess that would kinda hurt the tsx's target market, having the accord being able to walk over it.

if i'm not mistaken, a sportsedan is something designed for the enthusiasts. who cares if its powerful enough for all the soccer moms or commuters that are going to buy one, seriously. a bmw badge is more than enough to sell a 330 to 90% of the buyers, does that mean bmw should make the next version just average in performance? great, its able to compete with a 1.8t or 325 in power, thats a real good bar to set for a sportsedan. setting standards like that and the rest in that list are just rediculous. passat, jetta, s40, haha, pahlease.

obviously the tsx isn't trying to blow anyones socks off, thats why i don't understand why you're making excuses for it. some people are so easily satisfied with average cars, guess thats why the us market keeps getting them.

Why is it so hard for people to understand that the TSX was designed to compete with the entry lux sport sedan market and the Type S will be for the next step up. No excuses are being made...it's just not the car you want it to be. You're not going to get M3 or S4 performance out of the TSX. Quit complainin' about the car not being what it's not designed to be. If you're looking for a hotrod, give it up...you're not getting one.

BMW has found that they sell more 3 series sedans because they offer them in two flavors. Audi has found the same thing. Now Acura is jumping onboard. The TSX will be the top of it's class in performance (325, A4 1.8T) and the TSX Type S will be at the top of it's class in performance (330, A4 3.0). Heck, isn't the estimated 0-60 on the TSX the same as the performance on the A4 3.0? And the Type S will only be faster.

I don't think the TSX is underpowered for what it's supposed to be. 200hp out of a 2.4 litre engine is what many of us were begging from Honda back in the days where Honda was bent on peak horsepower with only secondary regard to torque (pre-iVTEC days).

I think the primary problem with the TSX is that it is heavier than expected for its powerplant, tiring, and drive configuration. Consider that its bigger cousin, the Accord EX 5MT sedan, only weighs 3109lbs with a related engine of the same displacement. Being that the TSX was going to be smaller with a greater emphasis on agility, we were all expecting fully-loaded cars no heavier than 3100lbs. We are, after all, talking about the spiritual and niche successor to the Integra sedan.

I think we should be very careful about estimated performance figures. Everybody even on vtec.net seems to believe that they're a bit optimistic for the car's known weight and known output. Sure, gearing makes a difference, but somehow I doubt that the TSX will be geared like an ITR (fast, but just about unliveable if you have to travel for an extended amount of time).

I'm not sure if a TSX in "Type S" trim is such a certainty. Do remember that Acura only anticipates a demand of 15,000 TSX's per year. I don't think they're anxious to repeat the investment they made into what turned out to be a low-volume car, the Acura CL.

Right, 200hp is nothing to scoff at in this market. It's 16-30 hp higher than it's competition and equal to or just barely under the torque of the competition and weighs less.

Me ams happy.

Another first review

http://www.thecarconnection.com/inde...&sid=183&n=157

"The TSX is simply the best-handling, most athletic four-cylinder sedan for sale in North America that doesn’t have a turbocharger or all-wheel drive lashed up to it."

thats convenient :)

I was going to quote the same thing. I think that says a lot for the car. But my favorite is
"the roof is rakish and the tail ends with an abruptness that leaves it looking like the tight buttocks on a female Olympic hurdler. "

..buttocks on a female Olympic hurdler...lol

What does that exactly mean, though?

Better handling/more athletic than:

Chevy Cavalier
Chrysler Sebring LX (4-cyl version)
Dodge Neon (except SRT-4)
Dodge Stratus SXT (4-cyl version)
Ford Focus (sedan versions)
Mazda 6 i (4-cyl version)
Mazda Protege (excluding MazdaSpeed Protege)
Honda Accord (4-cyl sedan version)
Honda Civic (sedan versions)
Hyundai Accent (sedan versions)
Hyundai Elantra (sedan versions)
Hyundai Sonata (4-cyl version)
Kia Optima (4-cyl versions)
Kia Rio
Kia Spectra (sedan versions)
Mercedes C230 Kompressor (questionable, since I don't know if they meant all F/I or just turbos)
Mitsubishi Lancer (except Evolution)
Mitsubishi Galant (4-cyl versions)
Nissan Sentra (including SE-R Spec V)
Nissan Altima 2.5 (4-cyl versions)
Oldsmobile Alero (4-cyl versions)
Pontiac Grand Am (4-cyl versions)
Saturn Ion
Saturn L200 (4-cyl version)
Suzuki Aerio (sedan versions)
Toyota Echo
Toyota Corolla
Toyota Camry (4-cyl versions)
Volkswagon Jetta GL (4-cyl, non-turbo version)

That's the comprehensive list of "four-cylinder sedan for sale in North America that doesn’t have a turbocharger or all-wheel drive lashed up to it."

IMO, that's undeservedly faint praise. The car is obviously better (and should be, considering its cost) than this list, but the writer got too lazy to bother comparing it against real competitors and instead settled on some absolute but meaningless praise.

Face it...it'll be a great car,,,BUT,,, it still won't be the Euro Accord...that car just looks fat-nasty..................IMO

www.honda.co.jp/auto-lineup/accordeuro-r/

It's sad that you actually typed that up DtEW :rolleyes:

I have been using my parents 03 Accord EX 4 cylinder for the past week (the Z is sitting out the bad weather)

Driving the Accord is painful. It's complete lack of torque is really annoying. It has a similar engine to the TSX although 40 less hp, but almost the same torque. I could barely get the front tires to spin in the rain after flooring it from a stop. 4 cylinder in a 4-door "sport sedan" - come on Acura!!

I just don't see how this car can compete.

you are right of course...how DARE they make a car you cant have a burnout on in the rain! bastards!!!

:rolleyes: :P :P :P

More like...how DARE they make a car that doesn't measure up to cusdaddy's expectations...

The TSX isn't going to be for everyone but it'll be a good car.

All I was demonstrating with that statement was how badly the car lacks torque.

It's not a terrible engine, but just not fitting in my opinion of a sport sedan. I like torque. I think the 3.0L should have been included as an option

If you like the car.. get it.

I'll enjoy my Z thanks very much

Unfortunately, not every car can have 274lb-ft like the Z...the funny thing is, they aren't even in the same class so why compare them.

If Acura is positioning the TSX in the same class as the 3 series and A4 then it's not severly laking torque...it's right on par. The 325 is considered a sports sedan and it only has a few more lbs-ft. The Type S will probably have the 3.0 you're looking for and will have similar (if not better) torque numbers than the 330. So, again, you can't say it's lacking if it's running with the rest. And to me, you're still saying "how DARE they make a car that doesn't measure up to my expectations..."

The TSX has what it takes to be a great entry level sports sedan and to say it doesn't because of torque is to say that the entire class of entry level sports sedans don't have what it takes to be entry level sports sedans.

we'll see how entry level it is when acura releases prices. if the base is ~24k, thats fine, but the last quote i saw from an acura exec was 27-29k and to me thats a little overpriced for the power level.

Considering a 325 starts at $28k and an A4 starts at $25K base...$27K for a TSX with all the usual standard features doesn't sound too unreasonable. Also, remember, the TL is going upscale so it's also going up in price and won't impede on TSX's near $30K territory.

I've never seen an A4 at $25K, base model or otherwise. More like $30K isn't it?

In fact, a "comparable" A4 base model is $29K with heated seats, leather & HID lights. Which, I believe comes standard on the TSX.

That's what I mean...MSRP on an A4 I thought was $25K...completely stripped down. But to get one with even near the options the TSX has,it's going to be far more. So I think anything under say 28K for a TSX would be a value and a Type S (when they finally release one) under 30K would be a down right great deal. IMHO

since when does acura go price to price with german brands? thats like the current base tl being 37-39k and you saying thats a great deal.

Have you heard bout the estimated pricing for the new TL? I know they're raising by a lot. And Acura wouldn't be going price to price with german brands if it were under 28k like I mentioned. A comparably equipped 325 would be north of 30K...probably 35K.

Wow i didn't know the TSX was coming with an 8" Navigation screen. Not bad.

Just received the April issue of R&T, in which there is a "First Drive" review about the TSX. I'm not going to type out the whole article, but here's a few interesting tidbits:

"Helping to solidify the front structure of the TSX's stiff unit-body is a standard brace connecting the shock towers to each other and to the firewall"

"...Acura tells us that a V-6 is not in the plans for the TSX."

"...the case of the 6-speed manual is made of magnesium to save weight, and the action of the cable shifter is first-rate, with short throws."

"Acura expects 30 percent of TSXs to be sold with the 6-speed manual gearbox."

Overall, a positive but not all that in-depth review, which is what these "First Drive" reviews invariably are.

U will notice one thing with their First Drive. Either they LOVE the car and can't wait to test it or they won't test it again unless it's a comparo (not a 1 car review). We'll see.He makes a very solid point.

Autoweek Full Test 2004 Acura TSX