jhb31

Just wanted to give some opinions of the 2018 Aspec Awd vs my prior Type S which I also bought new. It took a few months to get over the change from the type S but here is my assesment.

Pros:
The styling and 19 inch wheels are much nicer. Had many compliments on the car although even after close to ten years I got them on the Type S.
The ride is night and day better. The type S was a rough ride on roads where the A-spec is very comfortable.
Handling on the A-Spec is much better. Very little lean in the sharp corners and you can take them at a higher speed and step into the gas while your going through them. It's very nice.
MPG, while I only drive in sport mode (occasionally in Sport +) the car return about 25.5 mpg and I don't drive to maximize mpg while the Type S was a solid 21 mpg.
Adroid Auto/Car Play with waze on the top screen is very nice on trips.
Adaptive Cruise control and lane assist is great on long trips, like the way you can bump by mph rather than just decelerate and accelerate. Nice implementation on that.
Backup camera comes on fast, the type S was so slow to come on you either waited for it or already backed up before it displayed.
The AWD when turning into a road and accelerating or in rain is great.
The A-spec runs fine on regular gas, the type S would knock and ping non-stop on anything but premium. I don't mind paying more for premium but the A-spec runs fine on regular grade.

Cons:
The type S trans was far more responsive, you get used to the A-Spec but its not nearly as good or responsive as the Type S.
The quad tailpipes were much nicer rather than just the large ports with the small tailpipes. Really kinda a cheap implementation on the A-Spec.
Related to that the exhaust sound rather than piped in noise was much more to my liking.
Navigation system allowed you to set directions while driving rather than having to pull over. The A-spec you can use voice to set it while driving but it's more likely to cause you to have an accident as it really sucks to use.
Inability to shut off the auto shut off at stop unless you do it manually each time you drive. I forget half the time till I stop and then have to turn it off. There should be a system setting for that as it's rare I would ever want that feature in normal driving.

Neither here nor there:
After much adjustment I am getting very good sound quality out of the ELS system, the type S has an edge but after much adjustment its not too much of a difference.
Interior touch materials go to the type S but after some time goes by the A-spec is just fine with that but has some room for improvement.
Don't care too much for the anti-collision braking but you can shut it off.
The type S just felt more powerful, maybe the trans but it was IMO a faster car.
I don't notice much difference in braking, not scientific but feel the A-Spec brakes are are bit better than the brembo on the type S.

Overall:
It took me a while to get used to the differences but its a very nice car that could be better and has improved in some areas a lot. I regretted trading in my Type S for a while but over time have come to appreciate the A-spec for its good qualities. 3k miles and no issues so far. I still have only seen two 2018 TLX's here and no A-spec models which suites me fine.

donfilo

i currently have a 2018 aspec and im loving it traded in my 06 tl i agree old car felt faster but at higher speeds the aspec kills it ..1000 miles in, im liking it more and more.

Christopher.

This is just anecdotal of course, but it looks to me that although the TLX is far from perfect,people who are coming from TL and getting TLXare overall pretty very with it, except those that got burned by the early transmission problems and didn't have a pleasant time dealing with Acura (or just didn't want to have to deal with a major problem like that in a moderately expensive new car).

jhb31

I would say it takes some time to get used to the ASpec coming off the type S. Overall it's a much nicer ride and IMO the handling on the SHAWD is fantastic while also giving it a much smother ride over less than perfect roads. The push button shifter and trans are to me remain the weak links. I think a better trans would showcase the HP that it does have much better (although another 30-40 wouldn't hurt). It would be also nice for it to lose the lag when you slow down and then step into the gas and have to wait a couple seconds for it to find the right gear. As for the push button shifter maybe its just mine but there is often a pretty good delay when going from park to drive and more times going into reverse I have to hit the button a second time as the first time is either too fast after the car has been started or something else. This is annoying as I can't count how many times I put it in reverse and the car stayed in park till I pulled the reverse switch up again. Has anyone else experienced this? I assumed it was just a clunky implementation of the feature and you have to live with it. The lag going into gear is much more pronounced now in the colder weather. I do hope they bring back the shift lever with manual mode but that's certainly a couple years away if ever. I used that a lot in the type S and never bothered with the paddle shifters.

On another note I find when driving the rdx I am so used to just pushing the off button on the Aspec and it auto shifting into park that I do the same with the rdx and have left it in drive a few times after shutting it off.

Christopher.

I could say it 10,000 times and I still wouldn't be tired of saying it by then: Acura should refresh the TLX with a 3.0T V6 engine + the option of a 6 speed manual transmission and "active" multilink suspension which would enable it to at least equal an Audi/BMW in terms of handling. Make it a purely performance upgrade, don't even change the appearance from the stock model. Give us the car that lets Acura owners laugh at the Civic "Type R" and puts the Honda 2.0T Accord to shame, as an Acura "performance" sedan should.

In the mean time, I'm enjoying my 2018 Acura TLX that's "just" the FWD V6 Tech model with "P-AWS", smooth, powerful, quiet, beautiful car - a pleasure to drive/ride in/look at.

jc70ss

But at $45k they are up for a challenge selling a bunch of these IMO.

BEAR-AvHistory

Yeah, they want it stuffed full of 400HP turbos high end enterior with all the electronics & want it cheap + run on 87 octane @ full power. LOL. Maybe because it appears the I4 outsells the V6 ACURA thinks they don't really need a lot of power. Read one post today, his TLX might be slow off the line but it has plenty of power to pass.

If that is the overall knowledge base of the customers & potential customers ACURA does not need to do any more then keep up with the zoomy adds & forget real life.

Christopher.

?

I miss the adrenaline of a high torque launch from 0 MPH, but absolutely, if I want to pass someone at highway speeds, there is more than sufficient power to zip right past most other cars quickly - do you dispute that? I mean, I think you were being sarcastic, but I'm not sure....

mapleloaf

Are you suggesting that "real life" for most drivers is excessive power and that those that don't agree with that have insufficient knowledge? What is this real life you refer to....the demands of a few? Please clarify.

BEAR-AvHistory

Real life is you don't get 400BHP in a Japanese branded car for cheap. You want 400BHP buy a Infinity or Lexus. Infiniti 400BHP RED-SPORT starting price before options $51,000, AWD $53,000. Lexus GSF 457BHP $84,000, Coupe $64,000 to start. Highest powered ACURA excluding the NSX RLX 377BHP $62,000.

Knowledge base if you want inexpensive 400BHP cars buy American - Mustang GT 460BHP $35,000, Camaro SS 455BHP $37,000.

The statement about power is what ACURA marketing may believe in that the show a high performance car in the adds but don't deliver one to their customers. People will always choose what power level they want & the choice looks to be I4 for the TLX. Nothing wrong with that, just not something I would buy. Most here seem happy with the power the car has so maybe ACURA is right with their choices. Counter point is when they were a player in the power game they sold twice as many cars per year.

Its possible the power buyers all went someplace else & those comfortable with the current offerings stayed.

My snarky comment, sorry about that, was meant to say:

If people think you can just dial up a 400BHP & drop it into a 290BHP car cheaply they have no idea of the engineering costs involved. Forget certification & reliability testing you haive basic engine mods to hold the pressure, fuel system gets scrapped & replaced, suspension gets scrapped & replaced, Transmission gets scrapped & replaced, cooling system gets scrapped & replaced, Brakes get scrapped & replaced, tires scrapped & replaced, ECU scrapped & replaced & the list goes on heavier duty battery. These are just the high points.

Up to now ACURA has been able tp layoff development costs against ACCORD. If they go it alone with there now shrunken customer base how do the amortize he added investment for a high performance product that might be good for 10/15% of the cars sold. I would bet they are getting killed on the ROI for the development of the RLX 377.

Will be interesting to see how far from HONDA they can go economically in developing new product.

Second part was pure snark & a bit more directed. When I read people waxing about how powerful the V6 is now I seriously wonder if they have ever driven an actual quick car. Reality is TLX Camry etc are peas in a pod when it comes to not very powerful in todays environment. Competent yes powerful not really.

Christopher.

The TLX is not a race car, not even a proper "track car", I get that - but there are two or three relevant points coming from me repeatedly regardless:

1) The V6 TLX does have plenty of power for confident merging, passing, accelerating moderately fast (0 - 60 under 6 seconds) etc., but, that V6's "power band" doesn't kick in low enough in RPMs to make the car "exciting"/"peppy" (at low speeds, cruising "around town", pulling away from the stop light..).

2) As to your comment about me (and others?) "asking for too much" for the price, well, competition is tough and Acura does need to figure out how to deliver (at least some) more without raising their price even if most people don't end up choosing the higher power model of TLX, it needs to be there as an option for the brand to re-gain respect, to be able to claim "we are the performance [division of Honda]". The TLX costs more than the 2018 Honda Accord Sport 2.0T and it needs to deliver more also. Are you honestly going to try to tell us that if Acura were to take the existing TLX and move to a modestly more powerful 3.0L V6 Turbo, that the rest of the car is not built solidly enough to withstand that kind of power?

I'm saying: Hey, Acura, if you're going to charge me significantly more than the price of an Accord, and tell me that you are a "performance" brand, you can't deliver to me LESS performance than the same current year Accord!!!! (And expect me not to be annoyed about it) So, OK, if you can't give me a full 400HP in a TLX and still charge me "just" $40,000, at least give me more HP/Torque than the Civic Type R (which is $35,000) for $45,000 for the 2019 "Type S" TLX??? Please?

I think it makes sense for Acura to aim for the "close to an Audi or BMW in terms of performance" but it's main strength being in giving you more for your money and remaining less expensive over time to own.

edit: If I could "just" get 20 more HP and 15 more lbs of torque at ~1,500 RPM (without even any gains above 5,000 RPM) I would be so thrilled and love my TLX (more than I do already) at that point.

What if the 2.4 engine got a turbo and put out just a little more power than the Type R's 2.0T engine? Even if I can't beat a Type R at the track with that car (because it's heavier, among other things) I'm still satisfied with my more "luxurious" comfortable car that at least can claim slightly more power than anything Honda offers???

BEAR-AvHistory

No point in doing appoint by point thing because some will be just a repeat of what's been said before. On the TLX 0-60 some tests get high 5 others low 6. Current benchmark is around 4.7. for the performance versions of the other cars.

Even a "moderate" BHP boost will require a do over. The BHP the increase might be moderate but the Torque will jump up because that's what forced induction does.

I will disagree with you that while the 0-60 is not that strong compared to your targets that its gets better at speed with its ability to pass. Raw horsepower is what pulls you along when you want to pass at speed. Typical fast traffic flow here on the interstates outside of city limits is around 80MPH. If you want to pass a car running 75mph or so you better have a nice punch left in the car when you put your foot down. The least time you spend out of lane the safer you are. Rural two lane blacktop is an NC thing & opportunities to pass are limited. I like to be on the wrong side of the road for as short a time as I can.

Point is throughout the range the more powerful car will be able to pass in less time.

Production costs, market forces, where a product sits in its structure all effect the MSRP. The big bad Elephant in the room you are ignoring in the RLX which at $50,000 they can't sell now. Do they put anymore pressure on it by seriously upping the TLX game?

As a retired marketing guys I am really looking forward as to how the solve the problem. V6T or the Civic I4T at 2.0L or 2.5L. The Boxster is a 2.5T @ 350BHP the top GTS version is a 2.5T @ 365BHP.

I think the 2.0 or a 2.5T would be a good engine for the TLX without the full on development costs of a V6T. They might think they need the V6 for image but performance wise a 2.5T would work well in the car with the free + of better handling with more weight off the front wheels

Christopher.

Here's something to backup what I said that you that got that response out of you: The 3.5L V6 Acura TLX is slightly slower than the 2.0 Turbo BMW 330 from 0 - 60, but is faster going from 50 - 70:




In fact, even the Supercharged V6 Jaguar is only .1 seconds faster than the TLX at 50 - 70 MPH acceleration:



"How do you like them apples?"

svtmike

Weird how the BMW gets its groove back from 70-100 and runs that in about the same time as the TLX. It only loses .1 of that .3 second advantage from 60-100.

Maybe an artifact of the gearing between the cars when looking specifically at 50-70?

Christopher.

2.5? Not 2.4? A 2.4T or 2.5T would allow the TLX to potentially regain respect in so much as it could have at least marginally more power than the 2.0T used in the Type R and 2.0T Accord. Car & Driver says that: [the TLX handling feels ]"too comfortable and refined to be called" [a sports sedan] - so, IMO, the only other change needed would be to also add adjustable active suspension (in addition to the 2.5T engine).

The third time is the 1/4 mile, not specifically to exactly 100 MPH - that could be what makes it seem like there is an anomaly somewhere in the test data...

svtmike

BEAR-AvHistory

Depends on the construction of the 2.0. Two gain 500CC might take boring, stroking or both to open the engine. They would choose 2.4 or 2.5 based on what would be the least expensive, most reliable way to get the most displacement.

On performance rebuilds typically the cheapest way to gain displacement is to overbore the normal cleanup bore. A small overbore might be able to use the current pistons with oversized rings. Overbore was a common way to build a Mighty Mouse 406" Chevy from a 400" engine. Stroking is always more expensive but it enables bigger displacement gains. An example of stroking was a 350CI" block with a 400CI" crank. This made the 350CI" engine a 383CI" engine with a lot of torque.

Christopher.

So "BEAR", after my previous post showing some graphs (post #13), can you accept that I'm perfectly satisfied with a 4 second 50 - 70 time, but at the same time, I'm unhappy with my 0 - 30 acceleration? I don't think that nesc. makes me ignorant?

When buying a car, those of us who can't afford to choose both the BMW and the Porsche, and the Miata too, make some compromises - I'm happy with the heated leather seats, the remote start I had added, and the "comfortable, refined ride" of my TLX. Overall, I'm very happy with the car - consider that I'm used to driving low power inexpensive 4 cylinder cars like the Toyota Camry 2.0, Toyota Scion xD, etc. So, the near 300 HP of my V6 Acura is pleasing to me - I just really want a little bit more at the low end and will continue to hope for some way of achieving that without spending thousands or voiding my warranty...

pyrodan007

Look for another car. The engine is what it is, that's why you purchased it based on a certain price. When you need to re-engineer something, it's just too much work with a high price tag. Welcome to the world of compromises, a land where Acura excels.

BEAR-AvHistory

Not totally. I expect your car might actually be closer to the low 3 second range 50-70mph if driven to maximize the time reduction. But still as you go further up the MPH chain in start speed the time gets longer & longer the higher the start speed. It dramatically changes what is a safe pass into a you can't pass.

My choice for power is in the 75MPH+ range start speed for the pass because most of my non-city driving is interstate where 80MPH is common.

Something you might want to look at while checking out C&D is the 0-30 times for a number of different cars. You would be surprised & enlightened (ignorance removed) about 0-30MPH runs from a dead start:

Porsche Boxster S 0-30MPH 1.3 seconds 0-60MPH 3.5 seconds

BMW 4 series (320BHP standard engine) 0-30MPH 1.7 seconds 0-60MPH 4.4 seconds

TLX V6 SHAWD A-Spec 0-30MPH 1.9 seconds 0-60MPH 5.7 seconds

At a drag strip less than .5 seconds separates a lot of cars 60FT times, say 1.6 to 2.1. So think about it, a car running 117MPH @ 12.3 could take 2 seconds to move just 60FT from a dead stop.

Point is you can drop a handkerchief over most mid powered & upper powered cars falling the 1 to 2 second 0-30 time. Its what happens after 30 that truly separate the quick from the not so quick. Its what I mentioned before as speed goes up horsepower becomes dominant.

One of the trueisms from the Muscle Car era was never, never race a VW Bug across an intersection because he will eat your lunch..

SDSilverM3

Very helpful write-up on the comparison between the two.

We are exploring the possibility of replacing our '15 TLX V6 with the A-Spec SH-AWD (or something else) in the next 90 days. Having also owned a Type S, I still have a hard time adapting to the TLX and, frankly, don't like it very much in terms of driveability and feel mainly because of how the car feels.

Were you able to drive the FWD TLX V6 before going with the A-Spec AWD and, if so, what were your thoughts on all three?

Would like to hear any updates on the Aspec now that another month has passed. TIA.

neuronbob

I missed this post originally. That's a great comparison between the old TL-S standard bearer (3G TL ) and the newer TLX in A-Spec form. Nice job! For me, the car has been a solid, entertaining daily driver.

Christopher.

I am happy with my TLX for now, if I become friends with some "tuners" that have a shop, well then I'd love to slap a turbo/super charger on it, but that is not likely to happen within the next couple years.

I am casually looking at other cars, but, I am here on forums expressing my disappointment (which is outweighed by the positives) along with others, in the hopes that Acura will listen to us [collectively] as they try to understand why TLX sales have been disappointing, and, realize that even the "base" model TLX should come with at least a little more power than the [2.0T] Accord.

If the 2020 TLX comes with a ~2.4T engine in the base model (now that we know there is an "Acura specific" V6 Turbo in the works), then I will be more than happy to choose that as my next car in ~2021. If they do not, well, then I will probably say: "It was nice having an Acura this one time, I guess now I'll step down to an Accord and save some money".

jhb31

I actually had a 2017 V6 fwd TLX for a while before going for the A-Spec so I have some frame of reference for all.

Getting to your question of FWD vs AWD A-Spec. To me the AWD handling wise is far superior. The way you can power through turns is just impressive. I do believe the AWD also has suspension upgrades the FWD A-Spec didn't get so that probably plays a factor as well. While the AWD A-Spec handles better than my old Type S and 17 FWD TLX the ride is somehow much less harsh vs the Type S while still having very little lean when taking turns at higher speeds (I don't know how they managed that). even with the larger wheels. Also rain and snow driving are excellent with the AWD. There are two things I do miss from the FWD TLX and that is the fuel economy (28 mpg vs 22+ mpg in non highway suburban driving) although that may improve some when we get out of the cold weather and the fact that the FWD variant does not have the auto engine shutoff when stopping (you just can't always remember to turn it off every time you start the car).

I personally think the better handling/traction that the AWD provides is worth the mpg trade off. I tend to drive more enthusiastically than most so I would guess the FWD variant would suit many people just fine except for those that want AWD for bad weather (although I think in most climates FWD is capable enough).

Overall with some more time away from the type S I have come to appreciate the TLX for what it is. IMO the weak spot on the car remains the trans (lag in shifting in certain conditions, delay engaging reverse/drive using the buttons, car surges faster when using the paddle shifters to downshift). Had they gone with the lever shifter and RDX trans I would say they did it all perfect. I know a lot of people here say the A-Spec trans is much improved over the 2015 so take what I say with the knowledge that I don't know how poor that model was. Then again the TLX is the only car I have ever owned where I actually even gave a thought to the behavior of the trans as every other car I had it just worked as one would expect.

If I was looking right now I might wait to see what the new 2019 RDX drives like and also looks like once they show it off with the A-Spec trim package before doing anything (if Acura was what I was buying). I am more of a car person but my wifes RDX has a nice powerful feel but not so sporty of a look. I still get a lot of compliments on the car and have not seen another A-Spec on the road in my travels and few 2018 models overall but I know from other forum members posts there are a few around the area.