If I recall, the first few quarters of 1st gen TSX sales were quite modest. Then word slowly leaked out that it was a nifty little sedan and sales momentum built up.

And yes, I agree it is quite shameful how Acura's design by committee took a step backward with the 2nd gen.

If they introduce a type-s with the RDX engine and delete the SH-AWD, improve the steering feel and keep the weight down, I may reconsider.

 

^yeah the sales trend was a bit weird for the TSX - sales kept going up even in the 3rd and 4th MY when other cars usually plateau or start to decline. Comparing to the 04 TSX won't give a good indication of its success - comparing to last would be better.

As the review said Acura succeeded at making the TSX a very nice iPod accessory - not a drivers car.

 

The turbo + SH-AWD and added weight kinda go together. Seems to me that next year the only addition will be the diesel - any type-s or more HP is a ways off.

 

ugh. I know that its god awful, but when that type-s comes out in a couple years I may take a look at Acura once more.. my lease on the IS is done in april of '11.

 

brakes and tires are always the weak point of acura's. NOw add to it steering and handling.

 

I thought it was funny.

 

I'm still curious why Honda Europe doesn't want to release a V6 version for the Euro Accord there? Aside from gas prices, it would better for more variety.

 

Which is why I said delete the SH-AWD and keep the weight gain down.

 

Because gas is $8-9 a gallon in western Europe, that's why.

 

Playing first at Cannes and coming soon to a theatre near you... :wink:

 

But they can't - the turbo and SH-AWD go together. 250HP turbo + FWD = torque steer

 

?

Acura and Honda have had many a car with more than 250HP going to the front wheels. Ain't perfect but they're no torque steering monsters either.

 

^ You can torque steer any fwd car. My old Civic would torque steer if you just mashed on the accelerator pedal, and that was with a whopping 96 lb/ft of torque.

 

Not arguing that point. Point is, 250HP through the front wheels is hardly anything new....for anyone.

I for one would love to see a 250HP TSX. If that means FWD then so be it. Torque steer would be the least of my worries.

 

Non-turbo-FWD cars and turbo-FWD cars behave differently. Non-turbo engine has a very linear power output, while turbo engine has a abrupt bump in output when the turbo kicks in. This abrupt change in drive power also adds to the undesirable FWD torque steer, even for turbo-FWD cars with less than 250hp. In the extreme case, when the turbo kicks in while the steering wheel is at an angle (during heavy acceleration through a corner), you may find the front of your car suddenly jumps to the next lane from the torque steering effect.

 

Since when does turbo four banger have to be paired with SH-AWD? No written law of the universe that I'm aware of - it works for Speed3.

Yes, torque steer will pop up, but I can live with it.

 

I agree. Torque steer isn't what everyone makes it out to be anyway. If you moderate the throttle, the fwd car will accelerate nicely without the torque steer. It's only when you mash the pedal to the floor and expect it to behave like a RWD car, that's where the problem comes in.

 

aren't all these throttles DBW anyway? They can just control/limit torque output like every other company with FWD/turbo does (Audi, Volvo, Saab).

 

^ my Civic was old school, no DBW. But I have it in my CR-V. Honestly, the Civic felt more Honda without the DBW than the CR-V with it.

 

Remember that Honda likes to do things differently than everyone else, namely the lack of FSI, 6-or-more-gear auto transmission, high-output V6, V8, RWD, etc.

 

So you're saying they WANT you to have torque steer?

May as well slap that turbo and a couple type-S badges onto the TSX as-is, baby!

 

They do have torque limiting programmed into the ECU for the high-powered FWD cars, namely the TL-S.

 

+1 and for marketing and other reasons any "high" performance TSX will likely have SH-AWD - just like the TL. In the 09 TL there's only 20 HP ( 7%) more HP between the FWD and SH-AWD models. Don't you think they could have just as well left the higher powered one FWD? Of course but for a variety of reasons it'll have SH-AWD - same for the TSX.

 

All the Turbo talk is likely for nothing since Honda execs hint towards a 6. not a turbo 4.

 

I thought I heard from somewhere that a 6 won't fit in the engine bay? Or may be it's the turbo that doesn't fit.

 

Honda can always fix that by lengthening the engine compartment. Honda did it once with the 5th gen Accord during it's mid-model-cycle makeover, because they finally admitted defeat from V6 buyers and had to shoehorn the Legend 2.7L-V6 into the designed-only-for-a-4banger Accord engine compartment.

 

Apparently a turbo and all its plumbing won't fit but a 6 will. At least according to Jeff at TOV who asked.

 

That's what I read as well. Came directly from someone at Honda (can't remember who). The person specifically said no turbo.

 

Yea, thanks for clearing that up. It was one of the two that wouldn't fit. Thanks.

 

disappointed that edmunds didn't have a video of the review of the 09 TSX.

 

The local dealer is trying everything under the sun to get me to come in and buy an '09. They even called me today to tell me that since I'm a previous TSX owner, they were going to send me a voucher in the mail for $500 off!

 

hahaa, but you're going to buy a forester instead. i guess the 09 TSX isn't selling as well as Acura thought. the grill is something different and more aggressive, but current Acura owners aren't used to the look yet.

 

...and new ones aren't either.

 

Think of all the oil you can buy!

 

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/hot_lists/car_shopping/entry_luxury/2009_acura_tsx_road_test/(page)/1

Back when gasoline was still cheaper than Glenfiddich, Honda’s luxury division rolled the dice on a compact sedan with a wholly un-American persona. The 2004 Acura TSX, essentially an overseas-market Honda Accord, was cut narrow for Europe’s squeezed streets, firmed up for keen drivers, and armed with a no-frills four-banger to take on the turbocharged and six-cylinder competition. The only choices: manual or automatic, and navigation system or wrinkled map. Pitching this lean front-driver as the cut-buck alternative to a BMW 3-series, Acura execs seemed to have been swilling their own stocks of Scotch.

We fell in love. The TSX was compact but not cramped. It was frugal on gas but felt swift. It commuted serenely and also sliced asphalt into ribbons. It was less expensive, better equipped in base form, and when fitted with the especially satisfying six-speed stick, about 2.7 times more entertaining than most of the luxury cars then oozing across our pages. It averaged about 32,000 sales per year, twice the expectation, Acura tells us. A three-time 10Best winner, the original TSX departs us, leaving behind size-14 double-Es to fill.

Acura’s strategy? Hit the replay button. The driving joy remains in the 2009 TSX despite a few added inches and a few extra pounds. There are some improvements in cabin refinement, including additional sound insulation, and the roll call of standard features remains long. The changes are meant to address kvetches with the outgoing car by Camry and Accord leapers while retaining the core 30-something luxury newbies who like it edgy. If all hands report, Acura is hoping to ratchet up sales to 40,000 per year.

A 201-hp, 2.4-liter front-driving four-cylinder is still the lone engine. The base price remains under $30,000, at $29,675. Power leather seats, a sunroof, xenon headlamps, curtain airbags, stability control, and 17-inch alloy rims with Michelin Pilot HX MXM4 all-season tires are included. The rubber grows, from 215/50s on the old car to 225/50s.

Besides the transmission choice—a six-speed manual or a five-speed automatic—the single factory option is a Technology package. It includes navigation, a 10-speaker hi-fi with iPod and USB connectors and a CD changer, and a rear-mounted camera. All up, a TSX is priced at $32,775.

As before, the TSX is a Euro Accord with Acura badges. The sporting pretension includes, again, a sporting suspension of unequal-length control arms shouldering the front axle and multiple links in back, all on subframes mounted to a stiffly latticed unibody. Lift the hood to see the factory crossbrace bridging the strut towers. No aftermarket Viagra needed here.

The TSX is narrower and shorter than the new plus-size American Accord, but it is larger than the preceding TSX and about 130 pounds heavier. Buyers wanted more interior acreage, so the wheelbase was yanked out by 1.4 inches and the overall length by 2.7 inches. Width is up by three inches, with a similar increase to the track.

It won’t be hard to pick out the new car in a lineup. Not satisfied with sleek and simple, the designers went after the TSX with an angle grinder. The rear corners are squared off with vertical creases, the wheel arches flared out and then guillotined flat to look as though the body is being inflated against glass. There are chrome door handles and an oversized grille blade—anybody up for scything the north 40? All this bling and body clutter demands your attention, for better or for worse, which was perhaps the point. Shock, rage, death threats—a car designer will take anything over indifference.

The extra acreage? Our calculators insist that the front and rear seating areas each receive two more cubic feet. In the cup holders, perhaps. Individual interior measurements are up mostly fractions of an inch, meaning it’s as intimate fore-and-aft as the old car, with a touch more clearance side to side. In the back seat, where car companies tend to sweep their sins, the head and shoulder room is generous but knees poke the front seatbacks and feet are only grudgingly allowed under the seats. Even with gooseneck hinges, the trunk holds steady at a boxy and usable 13 cubic feet, with the rear bench splitting 60/40 to open a wider tunnel.

Designers got medieval on the dash as well. Arcing, undulating, fanning, multilayered, and inset sweeps of black, silver, and titanium-hued trim give eyes a workout. Honda has been downscaling with more brittle plastics lately, but the TSX textures retain a substantial feel, an exacting fit, and a made-at-Acura familiarity in the theme. Hubless gauge pointers (they arc around the bezels) are fascinating and leave open space for a useful trip meter in the speedo. The deep-scallop buckets wear comfortably on runs for the state line.

Opinions are split over the nav system’s four-axis sliding, pushing, twisting über-knob, Acura’s complex retort to simple touch screens. One thing is certain: The job knob is a necessity now that the TSX’s screen sits far from the driver. As in other Acuras, repeated use breeds familiarity, and the nav menus are among the easiest and most intuitive of any. With the Technology pack, the screen reports updated traffic problems and weather, even supplying the atmospheric conditions at your programmed destination. Cool! Or, um, maybe just mild with afternoon breezes.

The only real cockpit crime is the screen’s lack of sun shielding. It’s sullied by reflections of the grained dash almost from dawn to dusk.

To conjure more scoot from 2354cc, the engineers shortened the manual’s gear ratios in second through sixth by an average of five percent. Our 0-to-60-mph runs dropped, too, from 7.2 seconds for our last TSX test car [February 2006] to 6.7. The EPA city mileage actually rises by 1 mpg to 20, but highway frugality holds steady at 28, as did our observed mileage at 25

Breathing refinements in the 2.4 include i-VTEC, the “i” added to denote a new rotary-style timing adjuster on the intake cam, which strengthens midrange volumetric efficiency and torque. Horsepower actually shrinks to 201 from 205, but peak torque rises to 172 pound-feet, on a flatter curve, we’re told. The familiar VTEC two-step cam-lift-and-timing system for the intake cam polishes the higher revs, where a Honda is always on home turf.

A tightly wound spring still spins the TSX’s tach to its 7000-rpm redline but with reduced cabin boom thanks to extra soundproofing and fluid-filled engine mounts. And there’s more pull in each gear, so freeway-hole diving means less downshift work for the Swiss-calibrated shifter. The clutch is a wonder of elasticity, engaging with gummy softness no matter how badly mismatched the revs. It feels fried at first, but you come to relish the total absence of driveline buck and stumble. Why can’t all manuals be this pleasing? Or all sedans this much fun?

The TSX still rolls on its springs and the all-season tires have all-season limits, performing a just-average 0.85 g on the skidpad and 181-foot stopping distance (practically unchanged from its predecessor). Yet, few four-doors have helms as responsive or suspensions as composed and light of step. The adrenaline drip can start anywhere: a well-known off-ramp, on a long driveway, by apexing those three fast bends between the VFW and the fire station where there are no intersections and no hideouts for radar jockeys. Mountain switchbacks are lovely in magazine photo spreads but unnecessary in the TSX. With fast steering, firm brakes, and tight body control, it frolics just fine in the town where you live.

And that remains the TSX’s strongest argument. Competing in a class that is chasing size, horsepower, and luxury froth, the TSX is content remaining smaller, slower, simpler, and way more everyday amusing.

Breathing refinements in the 2.4 include i-VTEC, the “i” added to denote a new rotary-style timing adjuster on the intake cam, which strengthens midrange volumetric efficiency and torque. Horsepower actually shrinks to 201 from 205, but peak torque rises to 172 pound-feet, on a flatter curve, we’re told. The familiar VTEC two-step cam-lift-and-timing system for the intake cam polishes the higher revs, where a Honda is always on home turf.

A tightly wound spring still spins the TSX’s tach to its 7000-rpm redline but with reduced cabin boom thanks to extra soundproofing and fluid-filled engine mounts. And there’s more pull in each gear, so freeway-hole diving means less downshift work for the Swiss-calibrated shifter. The clutch is a wonder of elasticity, engaging with gummy softness no matter how badly mismatched the revs. It feels fried at first, but you come to relish the total absence of driveline buck and stumble. Why can’t all manuals be this pleasing? Or all sedans this much fun?

The TSX still rolls on its springs and the all-season tires have all-season limits, performing a just-average 0.85 g on the skidpad and 181-foot stopping distance (practically unchanged from its predecessor). Yet, few four-doors have helms as responsive or suspensions as composed and light of step. The adrenaline drip can start anywhere: a well-known off-ramp, on a long driveway, by apexing those three fast bends between the VFW and the fire station where there are no intersections and no hideouts for radar jockeys. Mountain switchbacks are lovely in magazine photo spreads but unnecessary in the TSX. With fast steering, firm brakes, and tight body control, it frolics just fine in the town where you live.

And that remains the TSX’s strongest argument. Competing in a class that is chasing size, horsepower, and luxury froth, the TSX is content remaining smaller, slower, simpler, and way more everyday amusing.

 

So when C&D doesn't like the GTR they're a disgrace, and when they shout praise for Acura, you post it up.

post #20 and #21 from this thread https://acurazine.com/forums/car-talk-5/c-d-911-turbo-vs-gt-r-vs-m3-bet-you-cant-guess-who-wins-392080/#post6000725

 

Positive spin on the car but have two issues that jumped out at me.

I'm pretty sure Honda expected sales of 1st gen TSX to be much higher than 16K/yr and 181ft to stop from 60? That has to be a typo.

 

Fully agree. In fact I 'was' going to throw in a light-hearted comment about it, but what good would that do...

I don't for one minute think that C&D is a very credible publication, especially after that recent shamble. But then I guess I'd be reading 3 mags and thats it - CAR, EVO, and Topgear - who don't even review a lot of the models we have in the States.

And that also doesn't mean that there aren't some credible writers left @ C&D. But now I approach their reviews with more caution.

If you like the article, read it. If you don't, don't.

EDIT: I like R&T too, so I guess that would make 4 mags.

 

seriously...Honda has always been known for their brakes!

 

the one thing that stunk for the 1st gen TSX was the turn radius and the rotors wore out prematurely