justnspace

iTrader: (1)

therein lies the problem

oonowindoo

Cheap and inferior are not the same thing.
Think about that for a sec.

RDX10

oonowindoo

Can you believe Acura initially thought putting the 150hp engine into the ILX was going to work

TacoBello

What's wrong with a 50k Type S? I'd buy one. If it has a proper transmission.

We will NOT get a Type S at 40k. Not even at 45k. Look at the RS400 as a direct competitor. The Infiniti G and Q have always stacked up against the TL and TLX. Now Acura is gonna be like "awww shiiiiiiet, this is hard. we will give people what they don't want and we will make trillions!" I highly doubt it. Of course they're shooting after the RS400. Why wouldn't they? The RS400 retails at 51k.

Once again, Ikeda himself said that a 350hp Type S will NOT cut it in today's market. And he's right. It won't. The Type S was never intended as an every man's car. It was always the most expensive trim that Acura offered. If a regular loaded TLX sells for 46k (before incentives- just quickly priced one out at 46k), there's no way a Type S will be the same price.

Honda will definitely undersell the actual power output of a V6T. They'll claim it has 375hp... but really, they're just under rating it, for whatever reason.

Everyone has bitched and complained about how the TLX lacks so much shit... well guess what, all that shit costs money and Acura isn't in the business of giving shit away for free. We have no idea what their margins are, but we assume we know and say stupid shit like " ______ is so cheap and easy to do. they can do that without changing the price!" But in reality, it's not like that at all. We also look at aftermarket prices for shit, not OEM prices, which likely go through much more testing, R&D, etc, to last as long as possible. You look at the prices of aftermarket HID kits and wonder why OEM applications cost at least 10 times more. Well...

Once again, I'm calling it like this:
- Underrated V6T- rated at 375hp (for the Type S)
- Price will hit the 50k mark in one way or another (for the Type S)
- Base TLX will come with the 2.0T, making a wee more power than the Accord 2.0T
- Base TLX will rely on the 10AT.

As for transmissions- the RLX has a DCT (8 speed? or 7 speed? I don't remember) that currently handles the SH's 377 peak horsepower, without issue. They already have a transmission, and a proper sporty one at that- that can handle the power. Guaranteed the TLX-S will rely on a DCT. The question remains whether Acura will do us a big favor and also offer a 6MT version. I'm doubtful they will... but I'll keep my fingers crossed they will. I WANT to get back into a new Acura. Also, they developed that transmission for the RLX and haven't used it in anything else. It would be a wise move, cost wise, to dump it into the TLX-S as well.

Christopher.

What could possibly be more spectacular than turning shit, into gold?

Acura could potentially, make an ILX (do they have to call it ILX? no) using an "almost CTR" as it's base, that simply spanks the competition in terms of being an "entry level luxury" car which is actually deserving of the title "compact luxury sports sedan" - by no means would it be the finest luxury car, or the finest sports car, or even near the top in either category. But on balance, it would be an excellent Acura - it would make those who long for what Acura used to be shed tears of joy. It could become as iconic as the Mazda Miata, or the Volkswagon GTi, or the Subaru WRX STi, etc. It could cost $39,500 and it could be the most awesome "under $40K" car on the planet.

TacoBello

a CTR goes for 44k. An "Almost CTR" would cost, what, 38-40k?

Who in their right fucking mind builds an entry level compact car and sells it for around 40k, expecting to move tens of thousands of units per year? Do you have any clue whatsoever on how car pricing works? Acura isn't going to sell a compact car that costs MORE than the much bigger TLX base.

Seriously Chris, you say some seriously stupid shit. As seriously stupid as the badging on your car. Give it some critical thinking first before putting fingers to keyboard.

And for the record, if you're going to make a mockery out of yourself and your car, at least do it right. It's not a S-TLX. It's supposed to be a TLX-S. Spend the $25 on a new "TLX" badge and do it right so it says TLX-S. Seriously, that looks so shitty right now. If you don't like the criticism, don't make that shit your avatar.

TacoBello

Also, in the automotive world, you can't turn shit into solid gold. If it was that easy, everyone would be doing it. The car business is highly competitive and every cent costs. Bean counters do everything they can do cut every cent out they can. You can't take something subpar, put no R&D money into it, expect to come out a home run and make billions in profit off of it.

kurtatx

It wouldn't be anything. It would be a bad looking sports car, a substandard "luxury car", and a complete non-starter.

The ILX is dead. No one wants it.

svtmike

Christopher.

We keep going back and forth - me saying "but they need to improve at the same price" and you saying "but the Type S has to cost at least $50K".

Well, until now, you'd kind of ignored addressing an important point I kept making. Which is: the current TLX just doesn't quite cut it vs Honda's own competitor in the Accord 2.0T. It looks cooler, it's quieter, but, Acura tries to tell me "When you step up from Honda, to Acura, you will see that Acuras are fine Performance automobiles...".

When I press down on the gas pedal and the response I feel is "hold on a minute while the engine revs up - ok, now we can go fast..." vs the more immediate low end torque from the cheaper Honda, it's quite disappointing. No, don't tell me: "you're just gonna have to pay $50K or more" to get that feeling, no, that's the wrong answer.

From Acura, I either want a car that's a little smaller and lighter than the TLX with a 2.0T, or, a 2.4T in the "base" TLX. Or else perhaps I will just step back down and get an Accord 2.0T for my next car, even though I loved my TLX's quiet comfort and enjoyed basking in the glow of it's beauty...

By all means, yes, go ahead and also make an ass-kicking ~400 HP "Type S" TLX with the Brembo brakes and active suspension, and if $50K is a competitive price, then so be it.

Wouldn't the [current] 2.4L TLX with an added LSD, stiffer suspension, and Turbo be a damn fine car for guys that wished they would have been in on the "I put a Turbo on my Civic" club when they were younger, but now can afford a more "grown up" car, but maybe still can't quite swing $50K for their car because they've still got to put kids through college and buy a car for the wife too?

Christopher.

What are you talking about? The quote I got in December was $34,900?

So no, it would not be "stupid" to suggest an ILX2 Type S @ $39,500 and a TLX-II Type S @ $50K.

There is no such thing as a TLX - S, yet - but, yes I know what you mean. I got that particular sticker for like $5, and while I do really like that little flash of red I get from the sticker, I can also laugh at myself at the same time. It's not quite as ridiculous and offensive (IMO) as would be, say, a giant purple dildo hood ornament?

I don't think anyone on here is seriously going to tell me that I should actually go to the trouble of "making it right" if I have not even legitimately done some respectable mod to my car like adding a turbo charger and tuning the exhaust, brakes, and suspension perhaps?

If I stiffened the suspension, installed a turbo, improved the breaks, and then properly applied the badge as in "TLX Type S", well, I would straight up tell anyone who gave me shit, to fuck off, thank you. Until then, yeah, I get it, it's lame, but it's my car and it's just a small, pretty little sticker making pretend that my car is one that simply does not exist in the real world.

kurtatx

He lives in Canada.

And the point is a good one. An "almost CTR" is not an ILX. The ILX is an almost Buick. ILX is a real life $25,000 car. Fords, Hondas, and Chevys are more luxurious.

Christopher.

We all agree the ILX is weak sauce, kill it with fire, yes? Some people like it regardless though, right? It has a few good points, but too many weak points - it has a nice 8 speed DCT right? I think it looks OK.

They've already spent the R&D on the Honda CTR, the Acura TLX, and Honda Accords (2018).

It's really not a "stupid" idea to take what would be an "almost CTR", add the sound deadening techniques used on the TLX, and make a new ILX which is a car that is the "entry level" Acura that is actually an impressive car, for what it is, for where it is in the price brackets, and compared to the other cars with which it competes. If you're going to do something, do it well is not a motto that all companies can follow in all cases, but it is one that a company like Acura, should follow and the ILX is an area where they need to go back and (re) do it right!

Yeah, no one said it would be "easy", I didn't say it would be easy. Perhaps it would be a near miracle to do it, and hit that $39,500 [USD] price point I mentioned earlier - but that's exactly what Acura needs [a couple] near miracles. Am I not right about that?!?

Edit: I mean, the BMW 3 series is kind of disappointing in some ways, isn't it? Isn't that a weakness that Acura could prey on? Couldn't they come in and beat BMW with a superior car at slightly higher price point? Say to the customer: "for not much more than a BMW 3 Series you get a significantly better car, without having to pay as much as the higher end BMWs..." (Same with the Audi S3 except, beat the S3 with a better performing car at a slightly lower price)

mrmako

I say the ILX should just be brought out to the pasture and Companies make mistakes (see Pontiac Aztek, or the whole Saturn brand), so you just get rid of them.

Now, I do agree that in order for Acura to make the TLX truly competitive in the sport /luxury market they will have to have a 375+ HP car, and the amenities that go with it for about $50K. If they go much above that, you're reaching into CTS/A6/E Class territory and those same shoppers won't go there. And an entry level TLX is not a terrible idea, but you can't water it down to the point you have a $20K discrepancy. We're not talking about a CTS vs. a CTS-V. Not even close. So the lower end TLX could be roughly 300HP with navigation standard for about $40K, with the Type S getting what has already been mentioned at about $50K. Steep to get there, but it would work.

Christopher.

I'm trying to say:Acura is going to have a car, some kind of car, at the ~$40K price point, yes? So, if you don't like the way I'm trying to say it, then how would you propose that Acura best address that $40K [USD] price point with their next shot at it?

Do you (mostly) all think that Acura needs to simply abandon the $35,000 and under price point? Why not take another stab at doing an ILX type car, but getting it right (at least more right than they did this time)?

mrmako

Audi did this with the A3, and turned it into a mini A4. Well, the A3 does not sell real well and the A4 has gotten crazy in price. But the A4 is a true alternative to the BMW 3 series. I don't think Acura could get away with doing this and break even let alone make a profit. Just my

JT4

And there is Cadillac's problem, they have priced themselves out of the market.. The 3G CTS, CTS-V etc are all much more refined and all around better cars compared to the 2G models but the price increases were ridiculous... A person coming out of a nicely equipped 2G CTS sedan (non-V)probably paid somewhere between $52-$55K for it.. To replace that car with a comparable 3G CTS they were looking at a $12k to $15K price jump...

I bought my V2 new in 2013, base MSRP was $63,200, after options my sticker was close to $73K, after negotiations got it for close to 65K.. Now granted a V3 is and all round more refined car with more power but, the base MSRP is now $86,500, a $23,300 jump....

Most V3's I've seen are mid to high $90's, for craps and giggles a while ago I had my dealer give me a quote on a 2017 V3 they had in their showroom while I was there for service. Sticker was $99,xxx he quoted me $90,xxx..Again the V3 was beautiful, but I don't think it was $25K better than my car..

First off I don't think I'll ever get rid of my coupe, second that was well out of my price range and third, as good as the CTS-V has been at that price I would look at other brands first. Especially the ones with AWD..

TacoBello

Dude, you just need to stop. The accord sells for so cheap because Honda is trying to keep a clear distinction between itself and Acura. That cost separation will always exist, even if the cars are identical. You're paying for a badge and nothing more. Do you actually think your car has 10-15k more worth of features over the previous gen Accord?

You just keep spouting off random BS like needing Brembos. Do you even know what the point of Brembos is? They don't even necessarily stop you any faster. What they do is dissipate heat better when you're on the track, and look pretty. How many Type S owners regularly hoon their car on the track? 0.25% of owners? Yeah. Really makes justification for the free Brembos you are looking to acquire, on Acura's dime.

If you can't afford a type S, quit talking about it. It's not going to be a budget car. And if you can't afford it, stick to what you have and be happy with it. If you got kids and can't afford it (which you've made clear), then quit dreaming about it. You can't just slap a turbo on the existing 2.4L. Well, you can, but Acura will build it with OEM reliability in mind, first and foremost. Just like the 1G RDX and it's 2.3L Turbo. It is known for chugging gas and not going anywhere, very fast.

Do you have any clue what an LSD costs? What about an entire turbo system (and I'm not talking about the ebay specials)? What about Brembos? Yeah...

And yes, you will have to put up with the disappointing low end torque of your TLX. Because no other option exists from Acura. Until the 2G TLX comes around. With the 2.0T.

TacoBello

and that's just it. This is what Chris doesn't understand. Acura can build the bestest car ever, but at what cost? They have no desire to stack up against the germans right now- look at Cadillac- they tried making a massive jump up and it isn't panning out the best for them, simply due to price. These are moves that need to be done slowly, gen after gen. There's no doubt Acura can build the bestest best car ever, but, are people going to pay the price for it? Once again, Acura is in the business of making money, not losing it, just to make some people happy.

TacoBello

No. They can't just "beat" BMW. Because BMW has huge brand cache that Acura simply no longer has. It doesn't matter if the TLX is infinity times better than the BMW. That in itself will NOT move cars. Sounds dumb, doesn't it? Unfortunately, that's how the general car buying population works.

TacoBello

My bad. I was quoting CDN prices of the Type R, not USD.

What you are also not considering is sedan sales are dying, year after year. Acura would be better off turning the ILX into a hatchback or something, as opposed to a sedan. As pointed out in here, A3 sales haven't been all that great- because no one wants sedans anymore. Especially tiny sedans with a big price tag. Oh sure, the RS3 exists- Audi was nice enough to bless us with that car. But that's a purpose built, rather expensive, compact car aimed to please a very small segment of the market. Audi also sells more cars than Acura, doesn't it? Meaning it has deeper coffers, I would assume. Plus they're part of the VAG group, and I'm sure there is some R&D split across the other brands that Acura simply does not get the same scale of benefit, from Honda.

If I'm not mistaken, the Chinese-only CDX is about the same size as the ILX... in North America, that CDX would be selling like hot cakes. Even though its a similar vehicle, just jacked up a few inches. ILX sales have been nothing short of disappointing, for an entry level car. That should be Acura's bread and butter, like the Civic is to Honda... and yet it doesn't even come close.

JT4

Exactly, more than anything its price point, its a shame because the 3G CTS is a great car that has rec'd good reviews and praise. I drove a V-Sport and it was really nice, light on it's feet and nice power delivery. Had Cadillac given the 3G CTS a reasonable new model price increase it would have done well.

In addition, instead of catering to their market, the same market that made the 2G CTS a success. I mean there was a time I couldn't drive two blocks without seeing a 2G CTS now I could go days, even weeks without seeing a 3G CTS, Cadillac decided to push the envelope and go up against the Germans.

Problem is the Cadillac boss and marketing people don't get it, people who own an E-Class, 5 Series, A6 etc are not cross shopping a CTS when there lease is up.. Even a first time buyer in the premium segment who is shopping MB, Audi, BMW etc is not cross shopping Cadillac.

Even the CT6, what a gorgeous car in person, I mean it's beautiful, Cadillac is not going to steal away any S-Class, 7 Series or A8 owners / shoppers... . Does Caddy really think that the guy buying a $100K S-Class really gives a crap that he can save $10K if he buys a loaded CT-6 Platinum instead.. Yeah maybe Caddy gets a few here and there but not enough to make it a success..

..

SamDoe1

You spend an awful lot of time explaining how much you would rather have had the car you could have bought, rather than the one you spent a lot more money to actually buy...

Also, I'm not sure you know how car design or business actually works.

Hint, we're not laughing with you.

Even if you turbo, exhaust, brakes, and suspension the shit out of your car (you won't do any of those things) it will STILL NOT BE A TYPE S. Mostly because it doesn't exist and you putting a sticker on your car won't make it any more real.

You can always slap a Ferrari badge on your TLX. They don't mean an Acura/Ferrari TLX either.

You really have no clue how this works right? You spend the money upfront in R&D to recoup it with sales. Just because they already spent it doesn't at all mean that they have recovered it. Also, they don't make the CTR in the hopes of making any money at all. I'm sure they are all sold at or very near cost or maybe even at a loss. The CTR is a halo car that shows what the brand is capable of, it isn't and never has been a volume seller. No one wanders into a Honda showroom looking for a Civic LX and walks out with a CTR. If you want one, you go to the dealership looking for exactly that.

The BMW 3 series is THE benchmark in the entry level luxury space. It's not at all weak, they sell a hundred thousand of them a year in the US alone. Than can come in with the best car in the world and it still wouldn't outweigh that blue and white roundel on the hood. Hell, the Kia Stinger is probably a better car than the 340i and I will guarantee you that the 340i will outsell the Stinger by miles just because of the badge regardless of price.

On top of all this, it is not at all inexpensive or easy to just drop in a new motor, new brakes, new suspension, and all the other performance goodies and toss it on sale. They have to test the piss out of it to make sure that it all actually works because they have to warranty each and every one of those to ensure that it meets spec for the millions of total miles that will be put on the cars by the public. All of this costs tens of millions in R&D and that doesn't at all even begin to consider operations and manufacturing costs to build a totally different model in a factory designed to build something else.

The RS3 exists as a halo car, they don't sell very many of them and people going into an Audi dealership would be going there looking for a RS3 and not an A3 premium base model lease special. They don't need to sell many RS3's because that's the point, they make up their volume with the normal A3 (well the Q5 lol) and not with any of the performance cars.

Christopher.

Isn't the main purpose of the ILX to be the car for people that want the Acura badge, but otherwise couldn't afford it? Doesn't that piece of the sales pie make it worth having a car that fills that market space? It seems like they simply failed to do a good enough job when they designed the ILX, right? Some of you say just let it die, I'm saying that since Honda has already created, and put into production, the CTR Acura now has a "base car" the new TLX could be built on that is significantly more awesome than the previous Civic that the current ILX was built on.

Excuse me, I didn't mean that they could suddenly beat BMW in terms of overall market share in the segment - I meant more like with the customers that wish Acura was more like "they used to be" and wish that they had a reason to go back to Acura, and, with new customers that feel like they could get more car for their money, for about the same price (or a little more) as the BMW 3 series.

If I was fresh out of college, or, a couple years, and I had a good paying Job but without the expenses of a family yet, I'd be looking at cars like the VW Golf GTi, Mazda 3, Subaru Impreza, Maybe a Honda... But if I look to Acura, and the [current] ILX is the one option in my price range, I might not be too impressed presuming I'm someone who takes the time to look online and read about the cars I'm considering.

I understand that perhaps there's more money to be made focusing on the older guys who are now more likely to be able to afford a nice car now, when they couldn't afford to buy the car they really wanted when they were younger. That does not mean that the ILX necessarily has to be so damn unimpressive?!? (or simply abandoned)

Christopher.

I don't think either of us expect that the "Brembo" brakes that would be put on a consumer car will be the exact same setup, pad material, brake fluid, etc. as what's actually put on a race car. Don't they make a "consumer" model which is appropriate to the driver who's using their car as a street car, but wants high performance brakes??? One thing I do know, the brakes on my Golf GTi functioned better than those on my current TLX do. I call out the "Brembo" brand name for it's marketing cachet, what I actually want is to simply have brakes that are moderately more capable than what's on there now.

We all have to make choices and some type of compromises, whichever price bracket we're shopping in - even if we are shopping at the over $150,000 range. Oh, sure, I suppose I wish I had a CTR also, but that doesn't mean that I want the CTR instead. Also, by no means does that equate to me wishing I'd bought a 2.0T Accord instead of the TLX.

I like my TLX, just that next time, I hope to have the option of buying an ILX 2 done right, instead of a TLX. By right, I mean Acura, deliver this "precision performance" you keep claiming to be selling. Make it so.

Sometimes a car company comes out with a car that's more what we want, and less what the "bean counters" want, and that can be exciting.

TacoBello

well said!







150% agreed. Talk about hitting the nail on the head. Sam gets it. Chris definitely doesn't.

Um, I never said that. I meant it in terms of performance and technology and whatever else.

You still clearly don't understand a thing about Brembos. They will do nothing for you, in terms of stopping power. The 3G TL had Brembos on the 6MT and Type S models... those brakes actually stop SLOWER by like a foot, than the base brakes do! Yep, it's been tested and proven! But what they actually do is stand up to abuse on the track, when temperatures get really hot, really fast. You will NEVER get that kind of heat, or brake fade, driving in a city, no matter how hard you try. You. Just. Won't. If you aren't tracking your car, you're asking for Brembos for little more than looks. Are you willing to pay anywhere from $1000-3000 more for a car, just because the calipers are pretty? Educate thy self.

SamDoe1

Well he already spent at least $5k more for a worse car just to get a different badge on the hood so I wouldn't put it past him.

Christopher.

I'd like to be able to brake hard and not worry that I might be warping my rotors - perhaps the stock brakes on this class of car are good enough that one doesn't have to worry about such already? No, I don't need race/track brakes, this car is my every day car, taking it on the track is not a priority (though I would certainly enjoy some track time). I would like brakes that instill a little more confidence in me, as did my Golf GTi brakes - I have not owned any more premium sports cars than that, I'm not an expert on brakes. I have changed brake lines and rotors myself, but, like you say, I'm by no means an "expert".

LOL - my hood did not even come with a badge. The only point for me to say that, is that you're so completely wrong in basically every possible way, with this one post. There are multiple significant areas where the Honda Accord simply doesn't even compete with the Acura TLX - the "badge", is just a cool bonus. As I mentioned in another thread, not only did I get a ~$4,000 discount off the sticker price, but I also got $1,000 more on the trade in value, longer better roadside assistance, a longer warranty, dramatically superior aesthetic appearance, superior handling (to what degree, is debatable), a car that is not in it's first model year release (I'll bet you that I'll have less problems with this car, than I would with a 2018 Accord), but most of all, something that I really appreciated when I test drove the TLX on the same day as test driving 2018 Accords was the quiet interior of the Acura TLX. As I mentioned previously - driving the TLX has an almost therapeutic quality due to just how much I appreciate the quiet ride and yet, at the same time, I hear a nice growl from the V6 engine if I mash down the throttle and rev the engine up.

The 2018 2.0T engine Honda's seem like they are great cars, and I do not disrespect anyone for choosing them - but there are absolutely things about my TLX other than the badge that drew me to decide to choose it over the '18 Honda.

kurtatx

Well, at least we know Christopher.'s answer to the title of this post is...

YES
YES YES YES

I AM SO UNHAPPY WITH MY ACURA

Christopher.

Do you know that Infiniti commercial, where the guy gets home from running an errand, but he "forgot" to get something and happily volunteers to go back out and get it? Well, when I'm not driving my car, I try to think of excuses why I need to go out and drive more, that should give you a clue as to how not-unhappy I am with my Acura.

After I get home, sometimes I just lean the seat back and sit in my car for a while to relax, I like it so much.

Flipster23

iTrader: (15)

Man we have another TLX lover on board. I rather by an Accord Touring over a TLX and save my pennies.

Christopher, why do you think you will have less problems with the TLX over the 10G Accord??

kurtatx

Your posts give off a "I need to justify my purchase" vibe.

Christopher.

In a thread dedicated to talking about whether you are unhappy with your Acura or not? Big surprise? [/S]

While I am not unhappy with my Acura, I do think the current gen TLX has fallen a little behind in terms of being set clearly ahead and above the less expensive Accord. Had I not been on a company car plan, I would not have chosen the Acura TLX over the 2018 Honda Accord. That is not the same thing as regret or unhappiness, it is simply clarifying the context in which I am happy with this car.

I understand, and I agree that given the current options: 2018 Accord vs 2018 TLX, it's really hard to see compelling reasons to choose the TLX over the Accord if you're even close to "stretching your budget" to afford the Acura. The quietness of the TLX strongly appealed to me, I love the look of the '18 TLX, and I wanted to participate in the Acura ownership experience, at least just this once. At this point, I would gladly accept either option : the hypothetical option: of swapping my TLX for and '18 Accord Touring and getting the difference in cost taken off my loan -or- the real option: I keep my TLX for x number of years (not sure exactly how many years, but probably 3 or more) as I have it now. Neither situation is/would be unappealing to me

As is not atypical with a 1st year new gen model, I'm sure Honda was under stress to get the car "out the door" and, produced in quantities and I am certain that they had to have gone through some issues during development as would any company undertaking the roll out of a new car model on such a large scale. I would say that yes, they have hit a home run, but as they walk in to home plate of course we can expect a metaphorical "sprained ankle" along the way as issues are uncovered and addressed.

With my TLX, it's been in production at least three years, and, while it's had perhaps more than it's fair share of problems (some of them serious) it's now a "mature" production model. It has a tried and true V6 engine whereas the Accord has not only a Turbo added, but so many aspects of it's design, and with so many new components that go into such a groundbreaking new model, I would honestly be very surprised not to see at least some minor issues cropping up here and there over the next year or two.

That being said, the wisdom of "don't buy a new car in it's first model year" would not dissuade me - I would, indeed, "foolishly" leap ahead and purchase the 2018 Accord, were I to buy a new car with my own moderate income this year, and had not had the good fortune of a new company car plan to buy a car for me.

For the future, I hold out hope that Honda/Acura will make the car that I really want, which would be this: an improved ILX with the 2.0T engine, or possibly, in a few years if they had by then made a new TLX with a base model 2.4T engine, and implementing all the other new Honda technologies found in the 2018 Accord, I would buy one of those if I could find a heavily discounted "left over" one from 2019, in 2020, or 2021...

WheelMcCoy

That would be like doubling down on an already bad investment. The TLX can be saved, but the ILX and RLX? Probably not, but car makers seem to prefer bookends. That is, an entry level car, a mid-level car, and a top-end model. I'm not sure that's the way customers roll nowadays.

04WDPSeDaN

iTrader: (1)

Christopher,

Just curious.... Is this your 1st time owning an Acura? Do you know the history of Acura? Do you understand where the automotive industry is today?

svtmike

It is really not surprising that a person who had to choose between Honda and Acura to take advantage of a work benefit and wanted a sedan is infatuated with his TLX. Especially considering it is his first car of that caliber.

I get a GM benefit from work. That is why I drive an Audi.

04WDPSeDaN

iTrader: (1)

Well that answers that.

Christopher.

Yes, well...

My GTi was more "fun", I've driven friend's BMWs, college roommate sometimes had one of his dad's Porsches and we'd ride around in that - but yes, other than those the "nicest" car I owned previous to the Acura was a Toyota Sienna - which is actually a pretty great car for everyday use when you have more than one kid. Oh, and I suppose when I was young that junkyard Firebird that I "repaired" (replaced engine, transmission, and brakes, and I mean EVERY single component of the braking system from cylinder to lines to rotors to pads...) was more, ahem, "exciting", although it had cruder suspension and handling than my more modern TLX does.

TacoBello

Enough said.