|
Originally Posted by oonowindoo
(Post 16162575)
How about the TLX A spec + the rumored V6T and SHAWD at $40k - $45k? that is the car i am talking about.
|
Originally Posted by neuronbob
(Post 16162014)
The 2018 TLX A-Spec, though....definitely not crap. I admit to liking the new grille (no beak, yay!), big round exhausts and the blacked out trim on my Still Night Blue. Makes the TLX look better, at least.
Originally Posted by oonowindoo
(Post 16162575)
How about the TLX A spec + the rumored V6T and SHAWD at $40k - $45k? that is the car i am talking about.
Originally Posted by SamDoe1
(Post 16162595)
Give it a good exhaust note and I'd be in for that. Give it a manual and I'll send in my deposit tonight.
I've been throwing around the idea for my next potential car and what kept coming up was something like the CTS Vsport or a S6 or GS-F....luxury sport sedan with good power and luxury but still sporty. If the TLX gets up to 400+hp with adding a turbo (as everyone is doing these days) and AWD and priced 40-45k....it can finally become competitive in this segment. |
Originally Posted by Flipster23
(Post 16162661)
That would be nice. Even better if Manual.
|
RIP manuel
|
Originally Posted by nist7
(Post 16162707)
Saw a blue TLX A-spec just yesterday....GREAT look except I still can't over the grille...feels like its too big for the car imo. Otherwise it was a stunner.
^ Hear hear. I've been throwing around the idea for my next potential car and what kept coming up was something like the CTS Vsport or a S6 or GS-F....luxury sport sedan with good power and luxury but still sporty. If the TLX gets up to 400+hp with adding a turbo (as everyone is doing these days) and AWD and priced 40-45k....it can finally become competitive in this segment. At $40-45k, i would be happy at 350hp. and the issue is never about the hp #s... it is about the actual performance since # is just a marketing tool. the bottom line is it has to be able to compete with 3/4/C43 in performance regardless whether it has 300hp or 400hp. |
Originally Posted by oonowindoo
(Post 16162733)
That is not realistic considering it is getting into M3/M4 category. Even Q50/60 Redsport at 400hp is starting at $51k + options
At $40-45k, i would be happy at 350hp. and the issue is never about the hp #s... it is about the actual performance since # is just a marketing tool. the bottom line is it has to be able to compete with 3/4/C43 in performance regardless whether it has 300hp or 400hp. |
Originally Posted by nist7
(Post 16162707)
Saw a blue TLX A-spec just yesterday....GREAT look except I still can't over the grille...feels like its too big for the car imo. Otherwise it was a stunner.
^ Hear hear. I've been throwing around the idea for my next potential car and what kept coming up was something like the CTS Vsport or a S6 or GS-F....luxury sport sedan with good power and luxury but still sporty. If the TLX gets up to 400+hp with adding a turbo (as everyone is doing these days) and AWD and priced 40-45k....it can finally become competitive in this segment. CTS-V is where it's at. :nod: If Acura ever did that, it would be 50k+. |
CTS-V Sports starts at $60k?
|
Originally Posted by Flipster23
(Post 16162744)
CTS-V is where it's at. :nod:
If Acura ever did that, it would be 50k+. I wonder how moddable the Vsports are?
Originally Posted by oonowindoo
(Post 16162752)
CTS-V Sports starts at $60k?
Good point on the performance focus and not just addicted to HP numbers. Maybe Acura will have something up its sleeve for the TLX!!! |
A friend of a friend bought a V3 and he's modded it already. Shit. is. a.beast.
|
Originally Posted by Flipster23
(Post 16162796)
A friend of a friend bought a V3 and he's modded it already. Shit. is. a.beast.
|
If I were on a tight budget, I'd get STS-V :O
There's a local flood water Texas V sedan auto for $16K with rebuilt title...V2... |
Originally Posted by rockstar143
(Post 16162822)
If I were on a tight budget, I'd get STS-V :O
There's a local flood water Texas V sedan auto for $16K with rebuilt title...V2... |
Ugh yeah. I'd never buy a flood car.
I've looked at STS-Vs as well....though lot of the forums and ppl say that Northstar motor is a POS (quality/reliability wise) and not nearly as good as the newer V motors.... |
I'm not buying one, I already own one!
Yeah, I hear that too...but triple the price too! LS ftmfw |
Yeah V2 wagon is a true holy grail for the V cars! Lots of jelly over here, lol.
|
I bet the tlx-s will be a direct competitor for the RS400. There's no two ways about it.
we all bitched and complained about why the tlx is without [insert feature here], and wishing it had [insert feature here]. Well I'm betting they step it up. The TL used to compete with the infiniti G. The TLX competes with the Q50. I bet the tlx-s will go against the rs400. Why wouldnt It? But those features we all vjtxhwd about not having, will cost extra. I bet you the tlx-s will hit 50k US. Such are the times. :shrug: Acura seemed to have listened a lot when it came to the mmc TLX. All we didnt get was more power and better brakes. Realistically, they could only do so much for an mmc. I bet they're saving it for the 2G. |
Originally Posted by SamDoe1
(Post 16162742)
This. A 292hp Golf R DSG does 0-60 in the same time as a 350hp Focus RS. When it comes to performance that we can actually use on a day to day basis, it's more about low end torque than higher hp motors. If Acura gave us a 350hp/350ftlb turbo V6 that hit that torque down at 2k or less, it would fucking fly unlike the dinosaur NA J series we have now that generates 260ftlb at a high 4500rpm.
|
Originally Posted by oonowindoo
(Post 16162752)
CTS-V Sports starts at $60k?
|
Originally Posted by JT4
(Post 16163016)
Base car starts at $62K, a premium V-Sport starts at $72K..
At that price point I would save a bit and go German with an S5 or M4. |
Originally Posted by nist7
(Post 16162707)
Saw a blue TLX A-spec just yesterday....GREAT look except I still can't over the grille...feels like its too big for the car imo. Otherwise it was a stunner.
|
Originally Posted by TacoBello
(Post 16162872)
Shoot higher. Jon Ikeda himself said that a 350hp Type S would not cut it in today's market.
In the off chance Acura adopted FI in their V6 lineup, I think numbers like that should be had from the base model ... 400+ for the Type-S seems right. |
Originally Posted by juniorbean
(Post 16163021)
:nod: Saw one in the wild yesterday from the 3/4 rear angle and it looked sharp. Then I caught the front and ugh... that grille. Definitely better than the beak but they still missed the mark. Hard to explain but the proportions are just a bit off. Otherwise, sharp car.
I parked next to one a few months ago. The overlarge exhaust ports, the overlarge spoiler, the overlong rear overhang, and the rearward bulge of the upper deck lid all combined for a really clumsy appearance when directly compared to the rear of the A4. The A-spec wheels do look good. |
Originally Posted by TylerT
(Post 16163022)
There's only so much you can squeeze out of something N/A .. clearly, something the J series cannot do for the masses.
In the off chance Acura adopted FI in their V6 lineup, I think numbers like that should be had from the base model ... 400+ for the Type-S seems right. My thoughts are this: the "base" 2G TLX will come with some version of the 2.0T. Haters gonna hate, but this helps Acura do battle against Audi, and the likes. The Type S, whenever it is released, will come with the recently patented V6T and will stack up against the Infiniti RS400. Now, actual power numbers are obviously unknown, but I feel it will be in the range of 400hp.. if anything, maybe a bit less. Honda will rate it at like 375-380hp at the crank, but it'll actually be putting down 400hp at the crank. Honda didn't spend a ton of money developing all new engines, to continue using the current V6. It seems forced induction is solely Honda's future. Now, that V6T has been rumored to show up in the "baby NSX", though who knows if that will ever happen. If anything, I see the V6T and the 2.0T filling Acura's entire line up, top to bottom, in one way or another. All they have to do is up the boost 1 or 2 psi above the Honda versions, and voila, different power, and as far as appearances go, it looks like a different engine due to the power change. I also see Honda adopting the V6T in their lineup- in the Ridgeline and Pilot. Ford has proved that turbo V6s work well in trucks. I see no reason for Honda not to adopt the same- they've always been the kind of company to stretch it's resources as far as possible, to maximize profits. |
Originally Posted by rockstar143
(Post 16162822)
If I were on a tight budget, I'd get STS-V :O
There's a local flood water Texas V sedan auto for $16K with rebuilt title...V2... |
Originally Posted by svtmike
(Post 16163017)
At that price point I would save a bit and go German with an S5 or M4. at 70K+ I would take a real hard look at M550i. It can be had around the same price since almost everything i need is standard. |
Originally Posted by oonowindoo
(Post 16163164)
Isnt STS for 70 yrs+ seniors?
Not the :rona: standard STS |
Even if Acura and or Honda develop a twin turbo V6 engine, I doubt it will past 340 hp. Let's say they do make develop a twin turbo 6 cylinder engine, they still need to work on their transmissions. They don't function correctly even with the N/A application. Moving past that, they will need to upgrade the suspension and brakes. Again, lets say Acura pulls through and makes real performance Type-s version, I can see it starting at 50K+ and at that price range the market for buyer isn't all that great. Keep in mind, if you ask any buyer today what they would consider to be a sports sedan or performance vehicle, Acura won't be mentioned much. Acura is far behind the rest of the crowd. Almost every other brand has something on the market that's worth bragging about. Acura only has the NSX but it's not an obtainable vehicle by most.
|
You all talking about $50K, $60K, and more... That's nice for a small section of the market, but...
Acura needs a ~$40K car that gives us a reason to buy it over the 2018 Honda Accord Sport 2.0T MT, beyond just being quieter, and having the A badge on it. Something that leap-frogs the Infiniti Q50 and Kia Stinger. Take away some of the customers that want an Audi S5, or a BMW (but can't justify the price), but, don't want to settle for an A4 or BMW 3 series? They will feel that they're paying less, but still getting more - And while they're at it, why not a nice and light AWD ILX w/the 2.0T engine? That would be my next car in a heartbeat. It would give the ILX a reason to exist beyond picking up just a few more customers to the Acura brand that just couldn't afford one any more expensive?
Originally Posted by 04WDPSeDaN
(Post 16163248)
Even if Acura and or Honda develop a twin turbo V6 engine, I doubt it will past 340 hp. Let's say they do make develop a twin turbo 6 cylinder engine, they still need to work on their transmissions. They don't function correctly even with the N/A application. Moving past that, they will need to upgrade the suspension and brakes. Again, lets say Acura pulls through and makes real performance Type-s version, I can see it starting at 50K+ and at that price range the market for buyer isn't all that great. Keep in mind, if you ask any buyer today what they would consider to be a sports sedan or performance vehicle, Acura won't be mentioned much. Acura is far behind the rest of the crowd. Almost every other brand has something on the market that's worth bragging about. Acura only has the NSX but it's not an obtainable vehicle by most.
|
What if one of the reasons that Acuras are cheaper is because they are milking the outdated engines that have long sice recouped their development costs??
Don't be surprised to see that cost difference to the cars that are creaming Acura in the market and in comparison tests shrink if Acura has come to the realization that being the value player in a luxury market is a race to the bottom. |
Originally Posted by Christopher.
(Post 16163266)
You all talking about $50K, $60K, and more... That's nice for a small section of the market, but...
Acura needs a ~$40K car that gives us a reason to buy it over the 2018 Honda Accord Sport 2.0T MT, beyond just being quieter, and having the A badge on it. Something that leap-frogs the Infiniti Q50 and Kia Stinger. Take away some of the customers that want an Audi S5, or a BMW (but can't justify the price), but, don't want to settle for an A4 or BMW 3 series? They will feel that they're paying less, but still getting more - And while they're at it, why not a nice and light AWD ILX w/the 2.0T engine? That would be my next car in a heartbeat. It would give the ILX a reason to exist beyond picking up just a few more customers to the Acura brand that just couldn't afford one any more expensive? Exactly - don't make another "high end" near-NSX car, blow us away and give us a reason to be excited again: make the next gen TLX the same price but do 4 things: 3.0T engine, "fix" the transmission, improve the brakes, and give it active suspension. But you already know Acura isn't going to do all that and keep it at the same price. The cost of the TL / TLX has only gone up and will continue to go up and nothing really to show for it. As of right now on Acura's website a fully loaded, Sh-AWD A-spec TLX is about 46k. Think about it, if they offered a type-s and it came with performance upgrades as in TTV6 engine, suspension, transmission. brakes and maybe some exterior and interior differences, I can see it starting off 10K more. At that point, most buyers aren't going to buy this vehicle. Let's face it, near 60K mark buyers are going to go for other vehicles that have been doing the performance gig for a while. Acura hasn't done this in a VERY long time. The other side of this conversation, Acura could be heading towards the right direction. Let's just hope they don't hang themselves if they do make this happen. |
Originally Posted by svtmike
(Post 16163283)
What if one of the reasons that Acuras are cheaper is because they are milking the outdated engines that have long sice recouped their development costs??
Don't be surprised to see that cost difference to the cars that are creaming Acura in the market and in comparison tests shrink if Acura has come to the realization that being the value player in a luxury market is a race to the bottom. Please, let me buy a $40,000 Acura that doesn't get beat by a $34,000 Civic :cry: But, even if the only improvement over my current FWD V6 TLX was adding 7 PSI of boost, I would be *so* happy! And if you need to reduce the engine to 3.0L from 3.5L to do it, then OK! |
Originally Posted by 04WDPSeDaN
(Post 16163295)
That's what I said..
|
Originally Posted by Christopher.
(Post 16163305)
But but but... What if they "Acurized" the Civic Type R, how much would they have to charge for that? If they can't impress us by releasing a TLX Type S at under $50K, they should do it with an ILX Type S. They really need to come out with a BANG, something that makes us do a double take and impress the customers they've lost, or, bring the new generations of would be BMW buyers with a car that is more thrilling than a 3 series, but still gives them the satisfaction of a "luxury" badge, at the price they can afford on an "upper middle class" wage.
Also, I'm not sure anyone would buy a obnoxiously styled, high strung Acura ILX. |
Acura needs to take notes. As of right now, there are some serious discounts on the Stingers. From what i've been hearing, you can get the GT2 model for 50K or less? For people to compare the KIA Stringer to the Germans, they must be doing something right..
|
:werd:
The CTR really shouldn't bother Acura. It is not the same class of car. The direct competitors to the TLX that people are buying instead despite their higher price tags are the problem to be solved. |
Originally Posted by svtmike
(Post 16163283)
What if one of the reasons that Acuras are cheaper is because they are milking the outdated engines that have long sice recouped their development costs??
Don't be surprised to see that cost difference to the cars that are creaming Acura in the market and in comparison tests shrink if Acura has come to the realization that being the value player in a luxury market is a race to the bottom. +1 Value buys dont work in the Luxury segment. It has been proven over and over. if you offer inferior product at a interior price, it is just that, an inferior product. You have to offer more and cost less than the Germans to even have a chance. Perception and brand recognition is strong in that market. |
I pay more for my TLX than the Honda Accord buyer pays for their car and I expect more, as I should! As engine technology evolves, so does the TLX engine need to evolve (as the Accord engine did) that doesn't mean (they, Honda/Acura) needs to push it up into a higher price bracket! It simply must be improved in order to become a more competitive/appealing option considering what competitive brands have been doing!
Originally Posted by SamDoe1
(Post 16163331)
The CTR is an icon. It's a limited run model on purpose because it's meant to be a showcase of Honda at their best. If what you say is true, they'd just drop the CTR motor in damn near everything and call it good...but they won't for a wide variety of reasons with maintaining what a "Type R" is globally being towards the top of that list.
Also, I'm not sure anyone would buy a obnoxiously styled, high strung Acura ILX.
Originally Posted by oonowindoo
(Post 16163411)
+1
Value buys dont work in the Luxury segment. It has been proven over and over. if you offer inferior product at a interior price, it is just that, an inferior product. You have to offer more and cost less than the Germans to even have a chance. Perception and brand recognition is strong in that market. I can answer all of you guys with the same statements: Acura does not have to be cheap, but despite your complaint against "value" the do need to at least offer a slightly superior "value" to what BMW and Mercedes are selling because their reputation [Acura's] is not the most stellar right now. You're right, they should not offer "cheap" (poor quality) product, they should (return to?) offer excellence - both in reputation and quality of their product delivered to the customer. When I say "Acurized CTR" I mean take what they've invested in engineering and infrastructure and basically, simply build an ILX that is actually worthy of the Acura badge. Take the existing ILX outer body, give it a slight "refresh", but give it the "guts" of the CTR. And let me tell you why this is OK: the ILX will be heavier than the CTR and you could use the lower "tune" level of the engine as is used in the Accord 2.0T - but, do still give the ILX the manual transmission that's every bit as good as the CTR. And, lastly, give this new "Type S" ILX SH-AWD which will further slow it down (slightly) compared to the CTR, yet make it more appealing to would be Acura owners (and existing Acura owners). |
The ILX is a shit car already. Why try to make something out of it. :shrug:
|
Originally Posted by Christopher.
(Post 16163438)
I pay more for my TLX than the Honda Accord buyer pays for their car and I expect more, as I should! As engine technology evolves, so does the TLX engine need to evolve (as the Accord engine did) that doesn't mean (they, Honda/Acura) needs to push it up into a higher price bracket! It simply must be improved in order to become a more competitive/appealing option considering what competitive brands have been doing!
I never once implied that Acura should duplicate the appearance! "offer more and cost less" is exactly what I mean when I say "value" - I don't mean give me cheap shit at a cheap price... I can answer all of you guys with the same statements: Acura does not have to be cheap, but despite your complaint against "value" the do need to at least offer a slightly superior "value" to what BMW and Mercedes are selling because their reputation [Acura's] is not the most stellar right now. You're right, they should not offer "cheap" (poor quality) product, they should (return to?) offer excellence - both in reputation and quality of their product delivered to the customer. When I say "Acurized CTR" I mean take what they've invested in engineering and infrastructure and basically, simply build an ILX that is actually worthy of the Acura badge. Take the existing ILX outer body, give it a slight "refresh", but give it the "guts" of the CTR. And let me tell you why this is OK: the ILX will be heavier than the CTR and you could use the lower "tune" level of the engine as is used in the Accord 2.0T - but, do still give the ILX the manual transmission that's every bit as good as the CTR. And, lastly, give this new "Type S" ILX SH-AWD which will further slow it down (slightly) compared to the CTR, yet make it more appealing to would be Acura owners (and existing Acura owners). |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:05 AM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands