deepen03

honestly, I like the 2010 RL we have over the new RLX. It just feels higher class inside. I feel that there are a lot of cheaper parts used in the new RLX, including the dashboard materials, leather and the lack of wood trimmed steering wheel.

Speed_Racer

I had been looking at the RLX based on price alone last November. There was some crazy lease deals at the time but the TLX wasn't around. I'd have to give it to the TLX if I was looking and had to buy now. I'm just hoping for a 6MT KBP TLX next year and I'm sold. Wish I knew the Acura roadmap now because I won't make the same mistake I made with the 2001 CLS thinking I could live without a manual. Ended up trading that in for a 2003 6MT CLS.

George Knighton

Before I got my 2014 RLX Advance, I had a 2010 TL 6-6 SH-AWD.

Like you, I believe that the quality of the dash in the older car was a little better.

I've heard reviewers praise the RLX's transition from soft plastic, to leather, to wood, to soft plastic...and I want to yell out that they should have seen the earlier car.

Nevertheless, overall, the RLX is a positive experience for me. Well...it's a positive experience except having to defend it all the time to people who've never driven it.

:-)

George Knighton

Manuals made some sense then, even though it was just a few years ago.

But in 2014, a 6MT wouldn't be any faster than an 8DCT or the 9ZF. It wouldn't get better gas mileage, either.

Honda makes such wonderful manuals that I'm with you. I hope they do it. But there's even less a compelling reason now than there was in 2010 with the 4G TL.

There's no longer even a need to homologate the 6 speed for racing, since they're using the sequential gearbox and taking the weight penalty.

:-(

George Knighton

I'm certainly sorry that you feel that way.

All I can say is that when it comes to the theory and practice of McPherson vs. double A arms, it is a very practical matter that makes every bit of difference to those of a certain ilk.

Meaning no offense.

I know how the Accord chassis behaves under pressure, if that helps.

It wouldn't really matter the other features or the price. Not to me, anyway. The biggest feature, SH-AWD, is substantially redesigned because it has to behave differently from the way it behaved with the 4G TL. There's no compelling reason for you to believe me, of course.

Let me say, nevertheless, that I celebrate the TLX along with you. I believe it'll be a hit the likes of which they haven't had in a long time.

weather

Hey George....I have come to appreciate and respect your contribution to this forum. You are very thorough and often right on the mark. By reading your recent posts about the double wishbone/strut assembly and the modification of the SH-AWD, I am a little worried. I understand they will keep the the SH-AWD and I hope they will not do this amazing system any dis-justice. I am such a huge fan of this AWD and I would hate for them to dumb it down....at least to a point where people that currently have a SH-AWD will be overly aware of the downgrading of their system. I am so hoping this will not be the case.

George Knighton

I'm sure they'll make appropriate changes and do the best that can be done with the Accord suspension, which is itself one of the best McPherson designs ever (according to reviewers).

But I do not see how they can put as much power to the rear wheels as they did with the 4G TL.

It'll be very interesting to see what they come up with.

And don't forget that even if they have to put less emphasis on SH-AWD, or make it lighter weight to save costs, when you integrate the whole package with AHA (A)gile (H)andling (A)ssist, VSA and other fancy electronics it's probably still going to run circles around the competition.

This is going to be a good car for Acura.

AlexG_6MT

iTrader: (1)

I'm with you up to this point. Maybe I missed something, but have they announced the changes to SH-AWD on the TLX?

Tommy8888

Acura should have really just followed the Infiniti brand in that they banked on their
'Entry Level Luxury Sedan' - the G Series.

Acura should have went all in on the TL after riding the success of the 3G and just say 'fuck it' to the RL/RLX and the TSX. Spend all their effort making the TL a great car and staking out a top 1-2 spot in that segment.

If you think about it, Infiniti's one true trump is the G/Q. Nobody give a fuck about their M's or whatever it's called. The Infiniti Suvs are inferior to Acura's as well.
Acura realistically only need their SUVS and the TL/TLX. That's it.

I think the problem is that with the RLX they are pushing the 50kish range, but I think in America at that range the BMW/Mercedes/Lexus/Audi group is just too strong to compete against.

Now in the 34k-42k Range.. Acura can really shine(they did before).

I personally like the ILX but agree with a lot of people that should have been a Honda.. like maybe a super Civic or something.

Tommy8888

That being said.. if the RLX was PRICED right. It would have sold like crazy.

George Knighton

No. They've hinted at it, and it is a technological impossibility that they'd be able to vector onto a McPherson nose using over 200 HP moved to the rear of the car.

I'm sure it'll be a great car, and I'm still thinking it'll be a huge hit with both the usual buyers and with (for the first time in a long time) buyers coming from outside the usual support base.

But SH-AWD must be redesigned for this particular car, as a technological and engineering necessity.

George Knighton

Yup, maybe. They started building it in the wrong place at the wrong time, and the MSRP had to be set assuming a certain dollar/yen value.

In January 2014, however, it is possible to get an RLX Advance for 51,500 or thereabouts, before tax and title.

Between the unpopularity of the vehicle and a big change in the yen/dollar value, Honda are giving dealers thousands of dollars for the RLX Advance, enough to push it not just below the published invoice, but well below the dealer holdback.

At that price, it's a very good buy.

I bought mine in December before they added the extra grand from Honda, so I paid 52,200 for mine.

You guys should think about driving one before you jump on the anti-RLX bandwagon so hard. You really will be surprised what it can do, performance wise, and you'll be surprised at the technology involved.

deepen03

quality of the dash and some cheaper materials used overall.. but to be honest. all Acuras in the last 4-5 years have gone to cheaper materials, except for the MDX and ZDX. They even dropped the wood trim steering wheels in the new cars! That's the one high class feature I love in the 2010 RL!

fsttyms1

Im not sure if you misunderstood me, but i didnt say there was anything wrong with the chassis or McPherson was equal to AA control arm. What i was getting at was comparing a car or making judgments of how it will handle while it is nothing more than a concept really isnt enough to make a fair or accurate decision. One can "Speculate" as to what it will have or how it will behave, but one cant make a sound or accurate statement based off of zero information.

Im not trying to start an argument or discredit your knowledge, And no offense meant, But knowing how the accord behaves doesnt mean much. While they may share the same platform, Simply changing shock valving/tuning or spring rates, bushing density, swaybar thickness, mounting location etc can all make a HUGE difference in how it behaves.

Again, Im not trying to start an argument or discredit your knowledge, But Explain to me why it is you thing they cant vector that much power into a McPherson strut designed suspension? Yes Multilink has inherent benefits but McPherson strut design today isnt the same as it was in the 80s, specifically in the knuckle area where quite a bit of engineering has been put forth to help aid in suspension geometry Have you looked at Fords Focus ST Revo knuckle or the Buick CSX knuckle design. The Focus ST has been called by many one of the best if not the best handling FWD cars ever made. It pushes quite a bit of power thru the front wheels using a McPherson design. How a car handles has quite a bit to do with other things like steering geometry, shock valving (rebound/dampening) etc..
My knowledge isnt just things ive read, I have spent many many years auto-xing, ice racing and many years doing countless lapping days and years of setting up suspension on all my various cars used for racing and road use and while it by no means makes me an expert, i do know a fair bit as to how little things can make a HUGE difference in how the car handles.

Also, the new Accord uses a Multilink rear suspension

AlexG_6MT

iTrader: (1)

Not quite sure this is a safe assumption at all. I agree that it will have to be changed - its a very complex system that takes a lot of fine tuning and calibration to get right.

Yes its true that the dynamics of a McPherson strut design are different then the current multi-link, but without digging into the numbers and having a ton of domain knowledge about the system I just think its a bit of a stretch to make assumptions about the final driving dynamics of a car that has only been released in prototype form.

For all we know with a chance to re-design the platform and move things around a bit the TLX SH-AWD could have vastly superior handling to the current 4G TL.

fsttyms1

Speed_Racer

You're right and I'm not holding my breath. As many people have said before manuals aren't about being the fastest. You already know having a SHAWD 6MT, it's just a different experience, that connection with the car you miss with an automatic/dct/pdk/dsg setup. The optimist in me hopes they don't want to lose another 5-10% to other brands by not offering a manual, but I know that's not a realistic assumption.

KeithL

Still not sure about that, the styling has to draw people in.

CGTSX2004

iTrader: (1)

I understand your explanation from a technical standpoint, but I am not convinced that Honda's engineers cannot find a way around the problem. If you look at cars like the current Audi S4, that has a McPherson strut suspension and torque vectoring with its quattro system. The new WRX also uses McPherson struts and has torque vectoring, BMW's cars are all McPerson strut and their xDrive cars can be equipped with torque vectoring as well. None of these are low performance cars and they all seem to have managed to find a way to adapt the front struts to handle the loads.

Keeping in mind that the rear suspension remains a multi-link setup and the front, while a strut suspension, is supposedly one of the best designs yet, I am confident that there is an answer than will allow Acura to continue to offer the performance boosting capabilities of SH-AWD without it being all that negatively impacted by the presence of the struts up front.

fsttyms1

Porsche 911 uses McPherson up front

George Knighton

It is a theoretical problem, an escapable problem. I am sure they'll create something that works excellently, nonetheless.

Their problem is to create a dynamic SH-AWD that makes the TLX corner very flatly, right up to the point that the car would put extra pressure on the outside weight bearing wheel in a hard turn...but not going much beyond "flat" in order to keep from running into the theoretical loss of camber inherent in any McPherson design.

Their challenge will be to design the system so that it goes right up to the tilt, but not beyond it.

The RLX suspension would be better for this, in theory.

But I'm sure they'll do a good job with the TLX and I still believe from the attention the prototype got, and which the specifications have received so far, that they've at along last got a good selling car on their hands!!

:-)

I talked about this with some of your posters in another thread, so I'll be repeating myself and will shorten my response for brevity.

First off, you're right.

There are certainly ways to have the Audi Sport Differential and other vectoring AWD systems with McPherson suspension.

But first off, let's discount your BMW reference because it is a rear bias car that does not do any torque vectoring.

The Subaru active differential and the Audi Sport Differential do not work the same way that the Honda SH-AWD system works.

The Honda system would send as much as 70% of the total engine power to the rear of the car, and of that 70% it can send 100% to one rear wheel if the system perceives that this is what you're really wanting. Moreover, the system integrates completely with VSA and AHA to do exactly what the system perceives that the driver is trying to do.

It can use all three systems to get you through Oak Tree at VIR in a way that surprises anybody who's ever watched a big sedan go through there before, or it can get you through Turn 10 at Summit Point right beside the Corvette that's passing you, and the systems work to allow you to do this even with a 10 mph difference between the two of you.

But....

There's no way that you can use this exact same system on a McPherson nose car. Assuming that the J Motor that goes into the TLX is the J35Y4, you're asking the TLX to handle a total of 217 HP on the rear wheels...and that is too much.

I'm sure they'll do something wonderful, but it won't be a system that sends 217 HP to the rear wheels.

I don't know how they are going to do it. Part of the overall system solution might involve something tricky like not letting you turn off VSA during an entire drive, so that the SH-AWD system can benefit from that computer's signal during the drive. Whether or not the VSA computer is intervening, the input from the VSA about your car's attitude (and I'm speculating here) could prove very useful to an SH-AWD system that is trying to manage, say, 170 HP that has switched to the rear wheels.

I've owned Hondas since 1989. I believe in the brand and what they are trying to do, both in the United States and Canada and in Japan. I don't want you to think that I'm a basher of the marque, because I do believe in them and although I see the problems inherent in what they are trying to do with the TLX, I am sure that they will do a better job than anybody else could have done.

George Knighton

As we discussed elsewhere when talking about this, there is no weight on the nose of a Porsche.

With Honda, the McPherson manages wheels that are driving and steering, and which might also be bearing the weight of a big J Motor! :-)

You know what I want to know? I want to know if they have reclined the top of the struts toward the firewall a tiny bit, to get that little bit of extra travel.

That was a part of the final solution for the Civic, to get it to handle better without blowing struts.

With their cars like the MDX, Ridgeline and Pilot, they don't have to worry about that because the wing is so big they can have a strut with a lot of travel.

fsttyms1

Tell that to Porsche

(from porsche)
Also the cars ability to corner flat has quite a bit to do with the sway bars. Ive run very soft springs before that in normal circumstances would allow the car to lean quite a bit but with the proper shock valving and swaybars the car cornered as flat as flat gets

And was it discussed that the platform its sharing with uses multilink rear suspension which pretty much voids all of the talk of McPherson struts being bad (in the rear) and not being able to handle all the power the J can send to a single rear wheel?.

If they designed the proper knuckle they could (copy and pasted for simplicity)

As for if they tilted the shock back more? Id like to know too if they added more caster angle.

George Knighton

If you talk about designing a Honda front suspension that toes out in order to keep camber, then aren't you increasing instead of decreasing the already dangerous proclivity of a front bias car to become very unstable with a trailing throttle?

I think this only works on Porsche because there's no weight up there.

I can't claim to know everything, of course.

We're still talking about it, to be honest. Let's see what the final solution will be.

I want to make it clear that I believe in this TLX. I just wish it had been based off the Japanese suspension instead of the American suspension. I understand why...I just wish that it'd been...well...to be honest...perfect.

:-)

That's a good question!

George Knighton

LOL.... And we're talking like Porsches do not have a very bad trailing throttle problem!

On the track when you go into a corner with a Porsche, you almost have to be either perfect...or slow.

With a Honda, if you screw it up you have two choices, depending on exactly what you've done wrong: (1)Floor it and pull yourself out with the LSD; or (2)Lift and let the car instantly rotate, and then put your foot to the floor again.

:-)

It's a lot harder to rescue a Porsche than it is to rescue a Honda. IMHO, of course, and not claiming to be any kind of god's gift to driving.

fsttyms1

And now you are talking about porsches rear suspension when we/I are talking about its front and it being McPherson design with the ability to have quite a bit of camber under cornering. Not comparing a rear mounted engine multilink rear suspension rwd vs fwd.

:-)

George Knighton

I didn't understand why you were typing the way you were, because I didn't understand why we were talking about rear suspensions at all.

All I'm saying is that McPherson suspension work on Porsche because there's no weight up there. They can do things with their design that Honda cannot. The very size of Porsche struts is insufficient for a higher performance Honda application, and where they put them wouldn't work with a Honda.

Do we want now to be talking about how the rear suspension affects your ability to mitigate trailing throttle oversteer, or what exactly is it that you're stipulating?

I'm sorry but I don't think I understand where we've gone.

121traffic

This is more for my own clarification since this thread has been super informative to me from both sides, but...I think what George was referring to when talking about vectoring all that torque to the rear was the inherent weakness of the outside front wheel set up, not the rear multi link. During aggressive cornering and turning, That front outside wheel is going to be bearing most the the car's lateral and potential kinetic energy, which is where George's worry comes from. I think the Porsche argument is a little bit apples to oranges since Porshe can do some radical things with the geometry in order to stand up to that kind of force that a Honda can't since the weight distribution is completely different.

fsttyms1

And like i mentioned above, with a better knuckle design (like the revo design on the focus or GMs newer super strut design) much of the geometry associated with A arm suspension can be retained.

George Knighton

Exactly.

I'm sure Honda will do a better job than anybody else has ever done, and in some ways they're (for once) on the cutting edge of development.

George Knighton

Monday morning brings a lengthy email from a friend in Ohio, who says he would not be surprised if I ended up in a TLX around 2016 model year.

According to him, most of my concerns are addressed by a new Sport Mode that means more than the Sport Mode in the RLX means, and it's supposed to have more than one iteration of Sport Mode available to the driver.

He also says that there are such significant weight reductions to both the new and differently vectoring SH-AWD system, and to the car as a whole because they can afford to use more aluminum than in the past, that I will be attracted to the car's performance figures.

According to him, I will give up my RLX for a TLX way ahead of the usual 100,000 miles that I put on a car.

LOL....

We'll see. We'll see. :-)

weather

George....Such a tease *lol*

BEAR-AvHistory

Think a big problem with Acura is the "good stuff" is always a few years down the road at the vanishing point.

Treblig

I like the sound of that! George's post that is.

kevTL888

i'm sorry, but after seeing what TLS brings, i don't think anyone would touch RLX. from its styling and powertrain perspective, RLX is now closer to Accord V6 Touring than ever. TLS meanwhile is a complete different car from Accord.

George Knighton

There is a huge power delivery difference between the 3.5 in the RLX and the Accord. :-)

They drive very, very differently.

If you stick your head under an RLX you'll see that it is a completely different and very expensive, very resilient suspension when compared to the Accord. That is what worried me when I saw that the TLX would be based on the Accord. They have since assuaged my concern, but you should still look closely at the differences there. They are huge.

I think that the RLX design idea more closely resembles some older Accords. Like maybe the 1994 Accord. Or maybe the 2003 Accord. Do you know what I mean? Just a smooth, nondescript nose.

But a huge difference is the width of the RLX compared to other Honda and Acura. I have been glad on a couple of occasions that the mirrors folded in. :-)

BEAR-AvHistory

The RLX is wider but not so sure about a huge difference. 1/2" wider than the TL & 1.7" wider than the Accord.

By way of comparison the Ford Taurus is about 1.7" wider than the RLX.

fsttyms1

The 14 Accord i sat in yesterday had more headroom than the RLX How could you build a car and put as much as you did into the size aspect and leave headroom so short? My 2000 TL has more headroom and it could fit inside the RLX.

DEman19901

But it damn sure is close.