GreenMonster

@ "Keen Edge Dynamic"

dom

If they put as much effort into their cars as they do their BS marketing slogans we may actually see a decent car out of Acura one of these decades.

Edward'TLS

To sum it up, Acura is not putting fuel mileage as it's top priority, but putting image and high hp as it's top priority. Why hike up to 300hp when it has to pair with gas-wasting AWD ? Why not stop short below 300hp when FWD is considered more fuel-mileage friendly ? All these show that Acura prefers high hp over fuel economy.

Seems like Acura is trying to enter the high hp arena soon with it's upcoming high-end model lines.

agranado

well after a listing of those features, the last piece of the puzzle is a Type-S model.

Texas

POI, going to trade my 04 TSX for an 09...in silver...http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/.../photo_13.html

Tired of 'No show Jones' Acura/ Honda...dang things cannot get out of their own way...

VTEC Racer

Are you kidding me? If Acura was worried about HP, then they wouldn't have DECREASED the HP on the 2009 TSX. If Acura was not concerned about fuel economy, then they would have gave the FWD model TL the same 300hp engine as the AWD TL. If Acura was worried about HP, they would have AT LEAST matched the competitions HP. So now Acura is NOT concerned about fuel mileage? Now I have REALLY heard it all. You should really make a separate thread with the same exact thing you said in your post and see what kind of responses you get. You prefectly described Infiniti, not Acura. LOL I can see it now, "Acura Joins The HP Wars With The Introduction Of The 201 Horsepower 2009 Acura TSX."

biker

dom

You presume Acura had a choice in engine options with the new TSX. I doubt they were given again choice. The were forced to piggy back off the Euro Accord. Take it or leave it.

Edward'TLS

I agree that Acura is putting fuel mileage as it's top priority NOW, as witness by it's complete lineup of lame vehicles.

However, the upcoming RL and the upcoming NSX will be using the high hp V8/V10 engines. V8 and V10 engines are in no way fuel efficient, I4 and V6 are in comparison. SH-AWD is by no means fuel efficient where 2WD is. When Acura decides to use V8/V10 and/or SH-AWD in its upcoming model lines, it is obviously taking a completely different stance, i.e., to place hp more important than fuel mileage.

The lower-end TL and especially the TSX will be sacrificed in terms of hp to compensate for the rotton fuel mileage from using V8/V10/SH-AWD in the upcoming high-end model lines, and as a result be able to achieve a good CAFE fleet mileage.

How about this. Acura prefers fuel mileage over hp for the lower-end models, but hp over mileage for the thirsty high-end models.

I admit that Acura is late going into this hp wars with the upcoming RL and NSX, and maybe the new TL if it has >300hp. But it's better late than never.

TMQ

I think the answer to performance and fuel economy is turbo. or twin turbos. BMW and Audi have showcased how to do them properly - powerful and smooth. Acura's first attempt is OK but needs more work. I hope their engineers are working on it.

Edward'TLS

FSI or direct injection technology is one that proves to work well in cranking out high hp with good efficiency = good fuel mileage. More and more car makers are adapting the technology, and coming out with new powerplants that are starting to run away from the Honda ones which used to be the benchmark in hp/liter back in the good old days.

Honda utterly refuses to develop direction injection technology. I guess it's an about face issue because Honda likes to pioneer engine technology rather than following others.

Texas

A Light shines in the fog..

iforyou

iTrader: (1)

You are right about Honda likes to pioneer engine technology rather than following others, but not so much about face. I think I said this before. Honda DID try direct injection in one of its gasoline engines, the one used on the 1st generation Honda Stream. However, the engine in the 2nd gen model beat the direct injection engine in terms of power and efficiency. Since then, Honda didn't use DI for its gasoline engines.

Honda makes 4 cylinder engines that have good hp/Litre ratios, not so much for its V6. If they want good hp/L ratio, they would have used DOHC instead of SOHC, like the NSX.

TMQ

Honda engine technology is getting old... VCM is a joke. If I want a economy commuter car I'd look for Honda, but for high performance or luxury it's no longer worth it.

LuvMyTSX

Maybe there is hope for the future?


Autocar.co.uk says prospects are looking good for rear-drive sedans in Acura's future
Date: April 17, 2008 10:16
Submitted by: Jeff
Source: http://www.autocar.co.uk/News/NewsAr...llCars/232305/
Credibility Rating: Not Specified



Takeo Fukui has been dropping hints that FR sedans could be in Acura's future, but now the British magazine Autocar claims to have inside sources in Japan confirming that these are indeed in the plans. Said to be in the works are a range of rear-drive saloons (sedans), including a 7-series competitor, which should be ready by around 2015. Autocar also states that development on the next-generation NSX is "complete" and that we should finally be seeing the car debut at the 2009 Tokyo Motor show, after its initial 2007 TMS debut was scotched. Production is said to be set for the fall of 2010, which coincides with the launch of the Acura brand in Europe.

The familiar numbers of 4.5, 10, and 550 (as in litres, cylinders, and horsepressure) all remain intact for this latest report. A fresh twist is the promise that the engine will offer "racecar-like acoustics". Styling of this next NSX is said to have taken on "Corvette overtones", which is a bit amusing since the C5 Corvette borrowed a few cues from the original NSX.

Another interesting tidbit from Autocar's piece is that Acura "could be" working on an S2000-based 2-seat sports car that would be better positioned to compete against vehicles such as the SLK.

VTEC Link

dom

I'll believe it when I see it.

And I wanted to see RWD for the 09 sedans. Didn't they get "Everyone has RWD but you" memo back in 04?

LuvMyTSX

At least we're hearing something about it now, though.

phile

I'm still not convinced.

Costco

Although the hp/liter argument was pointless really. Was that really ever in anyone's mind at all when they were buying a Honda/Acura? Aside from a select few who got S2000s, it most likely wasn't. It was more of a ricer trump card that they pulled out when comparing their Civics to an American V8.

Ah, so rumors of a FR Acura sedan have surfaced? I expect it to become a reality no sooner than 2015 then. Just like the NSX, they have to do "testing" (more like false advertising to induce market interest) before they finally come out with it.

iforyou

iTrader: (1)

^ yup, that's what everyone does these days. Nissan did that with their GTR. The Europeans are the best with doing that kind of free advertising. They launch a base model, then the sporty model (ie, 3 series, then M3, C class, then C63), then update the engines after 2 years or so...you know what I mean...

Costco

Honda is about the ONLY company I've seen that used DI and didn't produce better results then. From what I've seen every manufacturer who has used DI has produced more power AND better fuel economy, except for Honda. Who can argue with things like a 5-20% increase in power along with a 1-5 mpg increase? Apparently Honda is so brilliant at engineering that they don't need it, but we'll see where their engines will be at in 10 years.


Actually, I looked it up and while it wasn't exactly clear, the newer Honda R18 and R20 engines (R-series is geared towards economy I believe) were used in the 2nd gen Stream. The 1st generation Stream used a direct-injection 1.7 liter engine and direct injection K20.

Also the 1st generation Stream had 4-speed (1.7) and 5-speed automatics (2.0). The 2nd gen Stream has a 5-speed auto (1.8) and a CVT (2.0) so that's pretty much moot. That's like comparing a D16 to a K20.... very different.

And in the real world and on the track, hp/liter means pretty much nothing.

Edward'TLS

Yes, hp/liter doesn't mean much to car buyers. But when Acura is using a 3.5L-V6 with under 300hp, and other competitors are also using 3.5L-V6 with way over 300hp, even a fool can tell that Acura is lagging behind.

Edward'TLS

Back in 1989, Honda developed a turbo 2L-V6 engine for the (Japan Domestic Model) Honda Legend. It was good but too pricey and so was dropped soon after. Now 18 years later, Honda revisits the turbo-charging technology and find good use in the RDX. Likewise, I'm sure Honda can do the same with direction injection (DI) after so many years of technological advancement. The only issue if whether Honda wants to follow others or not.

So don't tell me that Honda can't find benefits in DI technology while all other car makers can. If the engine in the 2nd gen model beat the direct injection engine in terms of power and efficiency, shouldn't the 2nd-gen-model-engine with DI be even better in terms of power and efficiency than the one without DI.

Honda is such a genius in building engines that it doesn't need to use the urea tank for it's line of diesel engines unlike all other diesel car engine makers, in order to pass the stringent California emission standards.

Honda used to be the benchmark of SOHC V6 engines (260hp J32 used in the TL-S/CL-S, 240hp J30 used in the Accord) some 6 years ago. Now that all other car makers have caught up and some have even overtaken Honda. If DOHC is the way to go, so be it. Honda could have built on top of the NSX DOHC V6 engine to save time and money, rather than to start from scratch. 6 years is a long time for Honda to sit and do nothing.

Nothing is impossible. It's just a matter of the top man in Honda wanting to do it or not.

biker

Not if that under 300 HP car out performs that over 300 HP car and gets better mileage to boot.

Edward'TLS

Out-perform <= doesn't that belong on the track.

Most buyers compare cars by the engine specs and 0-60 numbers. It won't mean much to them when you tell them this under-300hp car is 1 second faster in lap time over this over-300hp car on the Sebring circuit.

mrdeeno

And what example do you have of this? Considering that every Honda/Acura model that will have 300hp will also have additional weight and parasitic loss of an AWD system, I don't see any 300hp Acura model "outperforming" other 300hp competitors in either performance OR fuel mileage since its competitors aren't required to be handicapped by an AWD system because they had the foresight to build on RWD platforms.

Edward'TLS

^^^^^ Well said.

Costco

Alright, Acura doesn't want to take the lead in the segment and that's fine.... but what's worse is when they refuse to follow. Bad news.

iforyou

iTrader: (1)

Hmm, it's not that many years since the 1st gen Stream came out, nothing close to the 18 years you mentioned.

See, that's where the problem lies, if they were able to make the 2nd gen engine with DI to be even more efficient and powerful, they would have done it. Apparently, that's not the case. Who knows the exact reasons for that, may be Honda engineers were not good enough? May be the DI technology was not yet fully compatible with what Honda already had? May be the gain with DI does not justify the cost? There are so many possible reasons, I'm sure they had thought about that when they were doing their pugh chart.

They could have used the NSX engine and improved on it. But I doubt that it would meet the most stringent emission regulations that the J-series can easily do right now. That C series engine is dated back to 1985 in the Honda Legend, with 145hp. And I'd have to say it pretty reached its peak by the time the C32B launched, at 280hp (probably 300 for the NSX-R?). Its fuel efficiency and most importantly, emissions simply cannot match the J-series. What I think Honda should do is upgrade the J series to DOHC, that would free up some revs and thus horsepower. Yea, DI, is a good idea too, if they can get it right.

mrdeeno

I just don't like that fact that Acura refuses to follow, even when following means they will succeed. Sometimes they get "enlightened", but other times now. Look at the Honda Passport and Acura SLX as examples of Honda not following and then eventually giving in.

If they see based on experience of others that following will lead to failure, then fine. But when they refuse to follow when others are succeeding, then there's a problem there. As for being successful when gas prices are high, that's like a broken clock...it's right twice a day too!

iforyou

iTrader: (1)

Most buyers don't even care about 0-60 numbers, they probably don't even know what that is. Most buyers don't really know what all those numbers in the specifications mean. My dad for example thought his 1990 was RWD. Car enthusiasts look at engine specs and 0-60 numbers. True car enthusiasts also look at track times.

biker

None yet since the upmarket TL is not out yet but it will be interesting to compare its numbers vs. a CTS or G35.

dom

http://www.canadiandriver.com/testdr...-acura-tsx.htm

Looks like us Canadians get 3 trim levels. Base, Premium and Tech.

The base forgoes leather, HID's, memory seats, USB port, XM radio and fogs.

No doubt to keep the base price down considering the strong CAD dollar.

mrdeeno

My prediction is:
1. the FWD TL (with much less than 300hp) will be slower due to increased weight from the current generation. With all that increased weight it will also not handle as well as the current type-s, and the FWD doesn't help matters. Fuel economy may be better, but now you're comparing 300hp cars to one with much less hp.

2. the AWD TL (with 300hp) will be slower due to increased weight of the car getting bigger/better equipped as well as the weight and parasitic loss of the AWD system. Handling will be aided by SH-AWD, but this brings the front-heavy FWD car on par with its more balanced RWD competitors. Fuel economy will be worse than its RWD competitors, similar to RWD competitors when they are equipped with AWD.

Edward'TLS

Yes, the best combination would be

(1) 300hp V6 with RWD - fast yet light, good fuel economy, cheaper price tag.
(2) 300+hp V8 with AWD - fast when even burdened with weatherproof AWD traction (people buying V8 won't care about fuel economy anyway).

Unfortunately, like you said, Honda, with bad foresight, can't do either one of the above combination due to the lack of RWD and V8 powerplants.

Edward'TLS

OK, using your "dumb buyers" logic, then your claim that "Not if that under 300 HP car out performs that over 300 HP car and gets better mileage to boot" will prove insignificant to the buyers.

But one thing that even the dumbest buyers will notice is that if they will win red-light or highway drag races when they put the pedal to the floor. This is purely straight line 0-60 or 0-100 numbers working in reality, no skill nor brain needed.

mrdeeno

How did a TSX thread become a TL/RWD/V8 thread?

But anyway...I don't think a V8 is necessary in this segment unless you're talking about the top-top end of the segment (AMG/M/V-series levels). Based on history and what Honda/Acura does, I'm sure they are kinda pissed at themselves that they have to offer both a ~ 280hp and a ~ 300hp TL and would rather have just 1 model...but offering just a 280hp FWD model isn't performance competitive with the current competition, and offering a 300hp TL w/ AWD isn't value competitive with the current competition. Due to the piss-poor foresight, they had to go with both.

iforyou

iTrader: (1)

I didn't claim that. I believe it was biker who claimed that.

You are right, and most likely AWD will win a straightline acceleration in any given weather conditions, similar to what the GTR is doing right now. No need to worry about wheelspin at all.

Honestly, it's really hard to tell if they will succeed with this 280hp FWD TL and the 300hp AWD TL. There are no sales figure to prove anything.

iforyou

iTrader: (1)

I believe the 280hp FWD is competitive against at least the CTS non-DI version. Let's say the TL will gain weight, but I doubt it would gain 500lbs for the FWD version (remember, CTS is at 4000lbs). Yea, it might not be as fast as G35 or IS350, but it's not the slowest either. It you say that's not competitive, then the same applies to the highly praised CTS too.

Edward'TLS

It'll all come down to the price tags. Remember that the Acura brand is in shamble right now, especially with the "no Tier-1 vehicles until after the new NSX is launched".

The new TL will probably sell if the much improved base car can keep the current price level, and around $40K for the top-line AWD TL, especially that the upcoming 300hp AWD TL is virtually a stripped-down version of the RL but with a bargainly cheap price - what the current RL should have been in the 1st place.