When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
nice car but what the hell does it have to do with the topic, not like it matters.
every thread on here gets infected with the same group of ~5 and the continuing whining and bashing of all things Acura.
Well we were talking about the suitability of Dog Clutches in an automatic transmission. Mr Saintor feels the are the greatest thing since sliced bread. The ZF9 is an example of an attempt to use the Dog Clutch in an AT.
Unfortunately the integration of this technology has not worked out. Owners & the industry have said they are missing smoothness are slow shifting & have poor kick down response with the ZF9.
My example is of a car I am familiar with, using a ZF8 that does not have the DC technology. The ZF8 is considered one of the best AT's in the world & that fact might tend to prove my point that Mr. Saintor rejects.
The possibly good news for the TLX is the ZF9 is only an interim transmission for use till Acura gets its home built box ready for production. Maybe the next TLX generation will be able to move away from the ZF9.
I know that many guys like these sites to be echo chambers cheering on the home team. In a time of rising sales that can be OK but its not all that helpful to the marketing guys.
In times of falling sales its good for marketing people to hear from former users about why they are former users. Its a lot cheaper to hold onto a customer than to try to get conquest ones.
Last edited by BEAR-AvHistory; 09-17-2017 at 08:27 PM.
Well we were talking about the suitability of Dog Clutches in an automatic transmission. Mr Saintor feels the are the greatest thing since sliced bread. The ZF9 is an example of an attempt to use the Dog Clutch in an AT.
Unfortunately the integration of this technology has not worked out. Owners & the industry have said they are missing smoothness are slow shifting & have poor kick down response with the ZF9.
My example is of a car I am familiar with, using a ZF8 that does not have the DC technology. The ZF8 is considered one of the best AT's in the world & that fact might tend to prove my point that Mr. Saintor rejects.
The possibly good news for the TLX is the ZF9 is only an interim transmission for use till Acura gets its home built box ready for production. Maybe the next TLX generation will be able to move away from the ZF9
In summary, Mr. Saintor isn't very smart. [/thread]
nice car but what the hell does it have to do with the topic, not like it matters.
every thread on here gets infected with the same group of ~5 and the continuing whining and bashing of all things Acura.
Acura is a great brand with class leading products, feel better now? As this will help future buyers who lease. I can't tolerate nonsense from Saintor, especially when it sounds like propaganda. I like data, pure and simple.
nice car but what the hell does it have to do with the topic, not like it matters.
every thread on here gets infected with the same group of ~5 and the continuing whining and bashing of all things Acura.
Seems to be on topic to me. OP posted that he's "most likely skipping the TLX until the next gen" because Acura "needs a new powertrain" and "a TORQUEY engine. Turbo is a must."
BEAR-AvHistory posted a BMW 440 with "368WHP through a ZF8. Great Transmission." He's just providing the OP with another option in addition to the "used b8.5 audi s5" that he's eyeing.
Nothing wrong with providing potential buyers with options, particularly options they may never have considered
Seems to be on topic to me. OP posted that he's "most likely skipping the TLX until the next gen" because Acura "needs a new powertrain" and "a TORQUEY engine. Turbo is a must."
BEAR-AvHistory posted a BMW 440 with "368WHP through a ZF8. Great Transmission." He's just providing the OP with another option in addition to the "used b8.5 audi s5" that he's eyeing.
Nothing wrong with providing potential buyers with options, particularly options they may never have considered
I love my boring old TL and loved the much nice looking model that came after it butt the 4GL and TLX didn't do much for me. I'm really looking forward to the next model. However if they let the same person(s) design it as designed the TLX I'm probably going to stop haunting this forum. They might be very good at designing other cars, I just think the 4GTL and TLX were some of the least visually appealing cars ever designed by anyone for any manufacturer. The quality might be OK but I'd put them at the same level as an AMC Gremlin for style. If I'm paying over 40K for a car I'd really expect it to be more appealing that than a 20K Hyundai or Kia.
Seems to be on topic to me. OP posted that he's "most likely skipping the TLX until the next gen" because Acura "needs a new powertrain" and "a TORQUEY engine. Turbo is a must."
Funniest at best. That torque argument is bogus.
You realize that 5-60mph, where the torque counts MOST in theory, the TLX V6 does it in 5.8s while a 340i does it in 5.9s.... is there a part for you hard to understand?
Well boy, we saw many times that you don't even have the minimal requirement to establish that.
You really have a thing for me. Too bad I'm too old for you.
And 5-60 is a fine metric, but the numbers are generally slower than 0-60, so I'm not sure quoting 5-60 is a legitimate way to say a TLX is faster because the fastest car to 60 is still a 340i from 0.
You really have a thing for me. Too bad I'm too old for you.
And 5-60 is a fine metric, but the numbers are generally slower than 0-60, so I'm not sure quoting 5-60 is a legitimate way to say a TLX is faster because the fastest car to 60 is still a 340i from 0.
Boy, you are the one constantly replying at me, not the opposite.
You don't understand why 5-60mph numbers are slower than 0-60? That actually explains *a lot*.
Alright. About 5-6 of you are about to get temp banned for about a month. We've warned and warned over and over in various threads over the last couple of months. Last warning.
Well you are very vulnerable to the latest fashion. So sell that car and enjoy yourself. You wrong.
I absolutely DID enjoy my shopping experience at Audi. Was expecting a lot more pressure, turns out they have better discounts that Acura ever offered me. For the same price as an Aspec, I got a loaded 2017 A4 Technik. They were even willing to give me the 2018 A4 close to invoice.
I don't give a shit what you'll say, go shopping around before opening your mouth.
You realize that 5-60mph, where the torque counts MOST in theory, the TLX V6 does it in 5.8s while a 340i does it in 5.9s.... is there a part for you hard to understand?
FWIW I would be more than happy to do a 5-60 with somebody here with a TLX. Bring a Go-Pro. If you win I will be the first to give you a thumbs up & "Well Done".
If you get bent out of shape losing a race you need to grow up. Have my share of wins & loses. Fact of life, "in every drag race 50% of the participants lose".
Car & Driver2018 440 instrumented test. Not quite my car this is the base model at 320BPH Mine is the performance version @ 355 advertised 368WHP dyno tested DISPLACEMENT: 183 cu in, 2998 cc POWER: 320 hp @ 5500 rpm TORQUE: 330 lb-ft @ 1380 rpm
TRANSMISSION: 8-speed automatic with manual shifting mode
DIMENSIONS: WHEELBASE: 110.6 in LENGTH: 182.7 in WIDTH: 71.9 in HEIGHT: 54.2 in PASSENGER VOLUME: 94 cu ft TRUNK VOLUME: 16 cu ft CURB WEIGHT: 3710 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 4.4 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 10.8 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 19.2 sec
Zero to 150 mph: 28.8 sec Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 5.0 sec
Top gear, 30-50 mph: 2.8 sec
Top gear, 50-70 mph: 3.3 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 12.9 sec @ 109 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 155 mph
Braking, 70-0 mph: 166 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.86 g
Got timed out. What we are trying to say is there is nothing wrong with the TLX its a nice car. Believe I was one of the first to state I thought it would sell very well when I saw the red Prototype.
I still believe that if they are not going to up engine it they need to change the marketing focus to what it is. Solid transportation with some preimum features at a good price.
There is nothing very special about my cars performance when compared to where the sport sedan market (which Honda tries to sell the TLX in) is right now. Audi, MB, Alfa, Genesis, Lexus all have cars that can put up similar numbers. Even the Kia Stinger looks like (pending instrumented testing) to be within the overall performance envelope.
Right now if you want to go Indy or F1 racing you need to look to Honda as one of the principle suppliers of engines. They have the technology in house but as long as "fans" are complacent & say what they have in the TLX is good enough they will never crack the market they are advertising to.
I did reasonably well running global marketing programs & if these were my guys they would all be gone. Today 99% of all car are good cars & its image that separates them. All the cars in the lineup don't need to be rockets but if you pitch a performance image you need at least one car to put your money where your add budget is.
Sorry but the NSX does not translate into the TLX having a sport sedan image.
Last edited by BEAR-AvHistory; 09-23-2017 at 03:42 PM.
FWIW I would be more than happy to do a 5-60 with somebody here with a TLX. Bring a Go-Pro. If you win I will be the first to give you a thumbs up & "Well Done".
If you get bent out of shape losing a race you need to grow up. Have my share of wins & loses. Fact of life, "in every drag race 50% of the participants lose".
Car & Driver2018 440 instrumented test. Not quite my car this is the base model at 320BPH Mine is the performance version @ 355 advertised 368WHP dyno tested DISPLACEMENT: 183 cu in, 2998 cc POWER: 320 hp @ 5500 rpm TORQUE: 330 lb-ft @ 1380 rpm
TRANSMISSION: 8-speed automatic with manual shifting mode
DIMENSIONS: WHEELBASE: 110.6 in LENGTH: 182.7 in WIDTH: 71.9 in HEIGHT: 54.2 in PASSENGER VOLUME: 94 cu ft TRUNK VOLUME: 16 cu ft CURB WEIGHT: 3710 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 4.4 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 10.8 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 19.2 sec
Zero to 150 mph: 28.8 sec Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 5.0 sec
Top gear, 30-50 mph: 2.8 sec
Top gear, 50-70 mph: 3.3 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 12.9 sec @ 109 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 155 mph
Braking, 70-0 mph: 166 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.86 g
Anyway the F30 is a lost gen. Each one I drove (a dozen) was disappointing and about every review talks about how previous gens were compared to this. Even worse with 4-cyl. Like Audi.
Anyway the F30 is a lost gen. Each one I drove (a dozen) was disappointing and about every review talks about how previous gens were compared to this. Even worse with 4-cyl. Like Audi.
I love the way the fact that the iron clad proof of all your claims - C&D times - don't count when they are against your claim. Will have to remember that the next time you post C&D numbers as support.
Have saved a copy of
Originally Posted by Saintor
C&D often reports insane results
to use. Expect you better get a new absolute data source
Also interesting you post 2 year old tests with different (335/435) cars with different engines (N55) than the 2017 test of the 2018 440 coupe with the new B58 engine. The B58 that R&T said "The linear power delivery from the BMW 3.0-liter is peerless—and that includes Porsche's new boosted flat-six." .
Since guys are posting better 12.7/12.8 time slips on the BMW sites than C&D got, the test can't be all that far off. Not sure they are running Launch Control. Personally with the 335is I did better not using it.
Will have to see how it fairs in future 2018 440i road tests so far only C&D has put it on the clocks.
Regardless since my performance pack dynos at 368WHP nicely above the base 440 pretty sure I can make some very respectable numbers.
As for reviews some review lead in's for the 440:
Car & Driver "Updates bolster an already solid package"
MT "Sufficiently pretty 4's mid-cycle redo focuses on dynamics"
R&T "340 is once again the Sports Sedan Benchmark"
Autoguide "the 4 Series is rightfully the benchmark in its segment, meaning it’s pretty damn good"
Maybe you were just driving old cars like your posted tests or maybe its just you.
I don't refer to C&D figures unless they are not alone.
Keep whining.
BTW the tests you posted indicated 4.5 & 4.9 not the 5.5 & 5.6 for the two cars with the old engines that have not been manufactured for a number of years in the 3 series.
Since you chose these old tests for engines that are not made anymore I expect you validated them since there were from that unreliable C&D
Guess its not a direct lie but it sure is poor attempt at misdirection.
.
Last edited by BEAR-AvHistory; 09-30-2017 at 06:45 PM.
BTW the tests you posted indicated 4.5 & 4.9 not the 5.5 & 5.6 for the two cars with the old engines that have not been manufactured for a number of years in the 3 series.
Since you chose these old tests for engines that are not made anymore I expect you validated them since there were from that unreliable C&D
Guess its not a direct lie but it sure is poor attempt at misdirection.
.
*Sigh*
Just for you, here is another one for that "new engine" in manual xdrive; 5-60mph.... in 6.2s .
IIRC, from the advent of the 5-60 test C&D has reported automatics almost always much faster than their manual brethren because they could be at a higher rev at 5mph than a manual due to the torque converter. Same with their silly top gear passing tests but that was because the manuals couldn't kick down.
It is not unbelievable to me that an automatic is significantly faster from a rolling 5mph start than a stick.
But maybe that's because I don't have an axe to relentlessly grind in a doomed quest to seem smarter than everyone else.
No way that the updates would make it 10% quicker, unless it is all about transmission's launch control. Ridiculous.
Its a 6MT the autos are a few 10th quicker. That said even the slow 6MT is sub 5 seconds to 60 & runs a respectable 13.3 quarter mile. Have no idea how the MT vs ZF effects the 5-60 run other than the stick is slow or even what gear C&D runs it in. Would be more than happy to play 5-60 with any TLX thats around.
As for the 8ZF, the transmission is arguably the best AT in the world & used on most performance cars. It has launch control but again thats how the car is out of the box just like it has Turbos etc. That Acura wants to play sports sedan without the same tools as everybody else is why its a nice grocery getter & not a sports sedan outside its TV commercials.
Personally, I can beat LC 10 for 10 so its not a silver bullet, just a nice tool
Details from the 340 6MT test you posted. Zero to 60 mph: 4.9 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 12.0 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 21.2 sec Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 6.2 sec
Top gear, 30-50 mph: 7.1 sec
Top gear, 50-70 mph: 6.5 sec Standing ¼-mile: 13.3 sec @ 104 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 149 mph
Braking, 70-0 mph: 160 ft Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.94 g
Not to put to fine a point on it but the AWD 340 looks like a better fit than the TLX does for the TLX TV commercials .
In the C&D multi car grocery getter comparison they ran the TLX had trouble besting the 2T's. The V6 TLX came in 4th against 4 2T's & a V6T. The 2.4 TLX was 7th.
A lot of blablah for not much. And 0-60 is not relevant here.
The fact that 5-60mph are often better on automatics has never been disputed and is not even the point.
The point is that 5-60 acceleration can not improve 10% by an increase of 20HP to 320HP. Not happening.
The last linked I posted showed a slower manual xdrive to 6.2s, but it is still inline with previous 5-60 of 5.5-5.8s, CERTAINLY not 5.0s
Yeah +20 might not get you there but its twice that at the rear wheels where the rubber meets the road. I expect as a former BMW owner you know that they fudge the HP ratings to keep spreads between the product lines.
The 335's on a chassis dyno were in the 390 WHP range. The 340 constantly dynos at 330/332 WHP a gain at the wheels of 400whp. In basic mod your engine numbers the 440 (B58) is equivalent to the 335 (N55) with a JB+ piggyback system installed.
Then just to round off the conversation because these are sports sedans/coupes BMW also has the M-Power Kits like mine is equipped with to add a little extra from the factory. Dynos show 370/378WHP. The equivalent to a (B58) with a JB4 MAP 1 installed. Which put them in the 12.8/110MPH range in the 1/4 mile.
A lot of blablah for not much. And 0-60 is not relevant here.
The fact that 5-60mph are often better on automatics has never been disputed and is not even the point.
The point is that 5-60 acceleration can not improve 10% by an increase of 20HP to 320HP. Not happening.The last linked I posted showed a slower manual xdrive to 6.2s, but it is still inline with previous 5-60 of 5.5-5.8s, CERTAINLY not 5.0s The last linked I posted showed a slower manual xdrive to 6.2s, but it is still inline with previous 5-60 of 5.5-5.8s, CERTAINLY not 5.0s
Sorry about the double post, too many fingers on the keyboard make for crappy typing.
Yeah +20 might not get you there but its twice that at the rear wheels where the rubber meets the road. I expect as a former BMW owner you know that they fudge the HP ratings to keep spreads between the product lines.
The 335's on a chassis dyno were in the 290 WHP range. The 340 constantly dynos at 330/332 WHP a gain at the wheels of 40whp. In basic engine power numbers the 440 (B58) is equivalent to the 335 (N55) with a JB+ piggyback system installed.
Then just to round off the conversation because these are sports sedans/coupes BMW also has the M-Power Kits like mine is equipped with to add a little extra from the factory. Dynos show 370/378WHP. The equivalent to a (B58) with a JB4 MAP 1 installed. Which put them in the 12.8/110MPH range in the 1/4 mile.
Relevance:
Since we are talking about acceleration time lets put it in a common but slightly illegal context.
A Hellcat is sitting at a traffic light & Saintor rolls up in his TLX & says
"Hey what to do have in that?
"Its a HEMI"
"Want to run my hot TLX?"
"Sure why not the car needs its exercise. but to keep it safe lets brake at 60MPH"
"Sure - One thing though, we have to roll up to 5MPH & match speeds before we go because a standing start is not relevant"
"Are you serious?"
Last edited by BEAR-AvHistory; 10-05-2017 at 11:05 PM.
You obviously missed my recent thread in which I praised the HEMIs, definitely more fun oriented than any 3.0T I drove. Too bad that the HEMIs are in kitsch cars that would sit right as homer-mobiles in The Simpsons. I am not sure that the owner of an ugly-mobile may understand that, though.
Agree the little HEMI/TLX story is as silly as your one man 5-60 crusade which it illustrates. It perfectly defines it as practical measure in street driving.
Fits right in there with the totally useless 30-50/50-70 high gear only numbers which the 340 did in 2.8 & 3.3 BTW.
Again I am so sorry the latest C&D numbers 5.0 seconds 5-50 are not pleasing to you. Actually I like the 4.4 seconds 0-60 & 12.9 seconds 109MPH for the quarter mile. I think these numbers for car #16 support the C&D numbers you don't like.
I am encouraged by them since I have an additional 47 horsepower to the wheels over and above car #16. That comes out to where my 335is with the JB4 was dynoing 370WHP when it was running 12.5 @ 114.5MPH. Life is good. Cars & Coffee tomorrow in Morrisville with the COBRA then some go-cart racing afterward, wish you were here to show your non A-Spec TLX.
Last edited by BEAR-AvHistory; 10-06-2017 at 08:06 PM.
09-17-2017, 07:42 PM
