+2 ^^^^^^^
If I were in the market to spend $36k, I'd seriously consider a Genesis sedan, or spending even less money on a Pontiac G8 GXP. But some people will buy a V6 TSX and it is important for Acura to offer choices.

Someone mentioned a SH-AWD/V8 combo. If Acura had offered that in a beautiful RL package, I would not have jumped ship.

 

Definitely Edward, I find it interesting that we get a stripper TSX in Canada while the Americans don't have that option. Perhaps they don't want to sell an Acura for like $25k?

 

Unfortunately, the Canadian population is only 1/10th that of the US, and thus the Canadian purchasing power is at best 1/10th that of the US.

For all commercial products, price breaks only exist in huge volumes. This is exactly why the exact same car will cost a lot more in Canada than in the US, even when the exchange rate is 1:1.

In addition, the Americans on average earn a whole lot more money than the Canadians, and when coupled with the outrageously high Canadian income taxes, we Canadians don't have much left to buy expensive cars unlike the comparatively loaded Americans.

Thus, an ultra-spartan TSX is a big welcome in Canada. Also, that's why the entry-level Acura in Canada is the el-cheapo Canada-only CSX, instead of the much more expensive TSX as in the US.

 

didnt he say First Gen...

 

To clarify - I was trying to point out that the first gen TSX is quite close in 0-60 time to the second gen V6 and the reason for this is the porky 3700 lbs the second gen has to carry around.

 

Edward..may be I will just move down to the States...lol

Road and Track and Motor Trend did a test with the TSX V6 and they got 0-60mph in 5.9s and 1/4 mile in 14.4 to 14.5 @98mph.

The best 2G TSX I4 number I have seen is 6.7s and 15.3 (or 15.1) at 93mph from Car and Driver. Either way those numbers are much faster than the 7.5s of the 1g TSX 6MT, despite the fact that the 2g TSX I4 is rated 4hp lower than before while carrying more weight. On a dyno though, the 2G TSX I4 actually puts down more whp and the torque curve is significantly better (~8-13 more wtq across the range than the previous gen). The 1g TSX's dyno has a rather huge bump in torque at around 6000-6500rpm, pulling up its peak power.

 

^ OK, those numers are quite different from what was mentioned earlier - about 7s for the V6 TSX. I had not seen any sub 7s numbers for the 2nd gen I4 TSX. Of course those numbers would have been even better if Honda kept the weight of the 2nd gen TSX down to the reasonable levels of the 1st gen.

 

nothing you can do about the weight.


To pass the strict US safety requirement + all the features that you ppl want + additional luxury features + bigger wheels + wider tires + quiet interior + bigger engine + ...


if the TSX weighs 3200 lbs then you will hear ppl complain about the road noise, lack of features, small wheels.. narrow tires.. no bluetooth, too much plastic... blah blah blah...

 

Honda/Acura has usually been underrating their performance numbers/engine power. They estimate the TSX V6 to take 7s to get form 0-60mph. I guess the numbers you've seen before were based on Acura's estimate.

Here's C&D test of the 09 TSX I4 6MT:
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/..._tsx_road_test

0-60mph: 6.7s (7.2s for the previous gen)
1/4mile: 15.3s@93mph

Motortrend got 7s flat and 1/4 mile time of 15.3s@93mph. http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...v_6/index.html


In terms of weight, I guess they could've used more lightweight materials, but I think ~100lb more isn't too unreasonable considering the car grew quite a bit in size (and like oonowindoo said, all those safety features).

 

whatever.

fail anyway.

 

Yeah but 3700 lbs? A 528 w/MT weighs 3500lbs - a bigger car with all those features listed and the "penalty" of being RWD.

 

Weight sucks but its something you gotta put up with if you want all the toys. My G37 is a perfect example. It weighs 3700 too but I wouldn't sacrafice any of the luxury of it for lower weight....

 

Hmm..the TL is 3706lb. The TSX is about 50-100lb less than that (depending on which mag you are looking at). The 3500lb figure for the Bimmer is for the base 528i 6MT. Adding At would add about 70lb. Also the 528 at this weight, does not come with a lot of features. It only has 17" wheels/tires, navigation, etc. Adding these features will add up quite a bit of weight. I think BMW also did a good job with weight saving for the 5 series, considering that the 1-series and 3-series are not that much lighter.

I'd say the 5 series is light for what it is, rather than the TSX being too heavy.

 

To an earlier point about why Nissan sells so many more Maxima's then G's for around the same price. Don't forget convenient access. Lot's more Nissan dealerships around. People tend to buy brands that are conveniently located. In Orlando, we have one Infiniti dealership and it's on the wrong side of the city for me (about 15 miles away in heavy traffic). If I wanted a Nissan product, they'd need to REALLY have something unique that I wanted to drive past 2 Nissan dealerships to get it. Let alone, an Acura, Cadillac, BMW, Volvo, and Lexus dealership along the way. So, I'm sure lack of dealerships compared to Nissan plays a part in that number.

 

It's the same thing for me in Illinois. The nearest Infiniti dealer is over 100 miles away, while BMW, MB, Acura, Audi and Lexus are much closer.

 

BMW 528 has 3.0L engine.of only 230bhp and less fuel economic. I am sure there are 4cylinder BMW 5 series who are lighter than EuroAccord.
535 is direct comparision with TSX. and it weighs 3700lbs with 17inch rims.
TSX 3650lbs weight with 18inch all season tires/Auto and 3.5L engine is not bad. considering its safety features
Fuel efficiency of 19/27 is near the top for 18inch tires. fuel efficiency of ES-350 is measure with 6speed auto and 215/17 tires.
Even 335 with 17inch tires and manual transmission weighs 3600lbs.
I dont know why there is complain about TSX weight/performance/fuel efficiecny. considering the price/quietness/performance/fuel economcy/style.
Who on earth want to drive around BMW 5/3 sereis on 17inch tires or TL FWD?

 

I really can't tell if you are being sarcastic or not man..lol....

 

oh he's serious....

 

 

LMAO.

For the month of May there are 12K new 3/5 series running on the road. I bet you half of those run on 17" wheels. Not chrome, by the way.

Someone must be drinking too much TSX kool aid.

http://news.prnewswire.com/ViewConte...5037137&EDATE=

 

 

When I was in college, comments like these would definitely trigger the professor to say something like "you should transfer to UCLA, you obviously don't belong here" or "when you graduate, please tell people that you went to UCLA."

Yes, I went to USC.

 

^

 

wow that thing is slow........

 

nevermind

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...v_6/index.html

0-60 5.9 and 1/4 mile in 14.5 at 97.8

 

For the price, the car is not worth it. You can scoop up a g37 sedan or a4 for around that price.

 

^ that argument always exists but the counterpoint is always the TSX is fully loaded at that price while the same can't be said with others. But then some others will jump in and say there are features that the TSX doesn't even offer....at the end of the day whether it is worth it or not, it really depends on what you want.

 

lol well you see Honda tend to underrate their engine/performance numbers...for the past few years.

 

Fixed for accuracy.

 

that's slow.

 

Compared to what? The TSX won't be the fastest car in its segment, but it will certainly not be the slowest. 5.9s to 60 and a 14.5 s quarter mile will be fast enough for 90% of the TSX's potential market.

 

^ so would a high 7s 0-60 I4 model.

 

Edmunds Review of the V6

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...mktid=cj260233

 

That's true, but it is easier to extract performance from a 3.5L V6 with a decent amount of torque than a 2.4L I4 that needs to be revved to stay in its sweet spot.

What is the demarcation between slow, average and fast? Does a car need to do 0-60 in 5 s or less to not be considered slow? As I said before, 5.9 s to 60 and a 14.5 s 1/4 mile is not groundbreaking, but I don't see how it qualifies as slow.

 

interesting take...

 

6.4 sec 0-60. that seems more accurate than MT's BMW-esque numbers.

 

^^^
I think C&D will get numbers similar to those of MT. Edmunds always posts the slowest times by far.

 

it's because they don't brake torque. they test the cars the way a consumer would drive it if he were to just floor it from a stand still.

 

With the I4 maybe, but not with the V6.

From the previous page.

I'd glady plop down the extra K for RWD, added power and the MT or 7 speed AT....to name a few. And just so its clear. A G with Premium and Navigation packages gives you as much and more than a TSX with Tech does.

 

That would be true if your suspension system is not a double wishbone design.

I don't work out, I'm only 5' 8", and I'm not particularly strong (I'd say I'm physically weak to be honest). I drive a 02 TL-S and I have never had any issues with torque steer. I doubt an extra 20lbft of torque is gonna make that much of a difference, unless you are talking about a Maxima. I don't know, may be some bodybuilders are just weaker than a weakling like me?