afici0nad0

bastard...

where were you when i was looking this past summer...

haha...

formerRSX-S

My TSX does not feel anywhere as 'tight' in it's steering, or as planted in a curve, as my last car did. Although the ride between the two is incomparable. It's for these reasons that I am getting RSB, stiffer front strut bar, coilovers or Mugen SS, and real rubber. Oh yeah, the only mod I had on the Type S was a set of Toyo Proxes T1-S, and the thing still handled very, very well for FWD.

absolude

Sold it in July or August. It was in Autotrader.
You're lucky for not buying it, because then I would call you a tieving bastard and you are too close to be safe from me now!!! Prelude was a very understated car.
Guy that bought it is safe in Niagara Falls area.

afici0nad0

also an excellent car.

i think someone here mentioned it also, but, too many drivers are too concerned with hp/torque/drivetrain...

i think other brands have excellent line-ups, but, i think some people should step back a bit and look at the total package (stuff you may not see on a spec sheet)...

cambomonk

The TSX is a nice car but coming from an EVO, it handle like a boat. My crx with d16z6 handles better. The TSX is comfortable on long road trips.

greendestiny

well my TSX handles better than my old EJ8 96 Civic Coupe...... stock for stock....

IMHO, the TSX rides hella stiff for a car this size and luxurious (i.e. i hate potholes and cracked freeway pavement).... but the cornering power/steering response for a car this size is also amazing nonetheless...

HoRRo

With 1100-1400lbs difference in weight, smaller car, of course your CRX handles better than the TSX.

Black_6spd

Although I haven't driven the RSX enough to get a feel of the handling characteristics, I'd have to say that my DC2 Integra was FAR SUPERIOR than my TSX w/ aspec suspension. In fact, I'd say that my TSX isn't even on the same planet.

In my old Integra, I'd have the confidence in almost any corner or emergency lane change with minimal oversteer / understeer / bodyroll. In my TSX, I've found that I've had to make several corrections in and out of a turn due to the higher center of gravity.

However, just being mentioned in the same breath as the RSX's handling make me feel better as a TSX owner.

feuss2

iTrader: (1)

The best handling car I've ever owned was my 93 integra. Hands down. Suspension travel was shorter and dampening was impressively tuned to the car... Even with its 14" wheels and stock suspension, it's low center of gravity and a good set of tires on that thing was enough to take turns that most people wouldnt try in an rsx. When I had the 93 teg and the 03 rsx parked next to eachother, the rsx looked like it had a lift kit installed...

The stock tires you get with an RSX are just complete and total shit. Yeah, I'm sure you could get 60-80k from them, but my 3 top concerns with tires are grip, grip, and grip. In that order.

Anyone who has purchased a TSX should proud to have made a very intelligent choice. The engine has far more torque than the RSX or RSX-S, and is consequently much more fun to drive. The transmission is much more refined, with the magnesium alloy case, its smooth and quiet, shifts quickly and precisely.

As far as real world practicality, you dont have to wind the thing up to 8k to get near your 200hp number. For the first few thousand RPM, the RSX really feels cheap and weak. Even the S. Most people dont drive that in the day to day, but would still like to feel like their car has a good throttle response. That's were the significantly higher low and midrange rpm torque figures come in... that extra 400cc's of displacement is definitely doing something!

Dont forget the headlights, and refined looks you get as part of that "total package". I know for the same price you can get a WRX or a SRT4 and some others, but seriously, who wants to drive in something that looks like that? I've added the xenon specialists bmw copy lip spoiler to my car, but I really like way it looks without body kits, etc... and i've noticed it attracts alot less attention from law enforcement than previous vehicles. It may not be fair, but alot of the times I see a car stopped on the side of the road, it often looks like something that's been bought for the purpose of driving fast... Don't ask me how I know...

You also get a better sound system, more room inside, 2 more doors, 17" wheels instead of 16's, dual exhaust which I really like, better headlights, much more comfort inside, the option of getting navi, and something you can insure as a 4-door, 4-cyl....

amadeus303

iTrader: (2)

Really? It just goes to show you how different personal preferences can be... Compared to other "family" midsize sedans like an Accord, Altima, Camry, etc., I guess the TSX would be a "rougher" ride... but compared to other sport sedans such as a 3-series or even a Mazda6, I'd say the TSX has the most ride compliance (in my personal experience). I recently switched over to coilovers, and I still feel like the car could be much stiffer while remaining rather comfortable...

Even in stock form though, I think the TSX strikes a great balance between ride comfort and handling performance.

formerRSX-S

When did this become an all out TSX vs. RSX thread?? I thought it was just about handling and suspension. No one here is arguing that the RSX has more luxury, refinement, or amenities than the TSX.

frescagod

um, have you ever driven a BMW? if so, would you prefer the suspension in a 3-series or the TSX? I'll take the 3-series, thanks. can you guess what composes a 3-series' front suspension? macpherson struts, yup. i think that it finds the best balance between handling and comfort, and yet, it's mac struts. it's a matter of how the suspension is tuned, not "double-wish is better than macpherson;" it's not that black and white.

my $0.02.

CGTSX2004

iTrader: (1)

For a street car, sure. For a race car, the double-wishbone suspension does a much better job of placing the wheels where they need to be. This is why most truly serious road race cars use it instead of mac struts.

Honestly, it's just a matter of engineering preference in a street car. There are advantages and disadvantages to both technologies.

frescagod

also, i had a 2004 RSX (base, 5spd) for exactly 11 months, and put almost 20,000 miles on it. i would say that the handling capabilities were about the same. body roll, tire grip, etc. i did, however, feel that the TSX held itself in place better when cornering; that is, i felt myself adjusting my steering more in the RSX when taking long curves. in terms of comfort, yup, the RSX isn't great on long trips; the seats are obviously supportive for cornering, etc, but that, coupled with the stiff suspension, lends itself to quite an unpleasant ride on less-than-smooth roads. the TSX is much better behaved.

turn-in and tossability probably goes to the RSX. it just felt more responsive to my inputs, and i don't really like the TSX's drive-by-wire throttle, either. the RSX's steering seemed a bit more responsive, but part of that might have been the thickness of the steering wheel and the wider, ergonomic grips at 10 and 2 o'clock.

my observations of both cars are using basically the same roads and many of the same routes that i've driven for the past 18 months.

frescagod

agreed. i will just say that one experience sticks out in my mind: my friend took me for a ride in his M3, and he took some normal 90-degree street corner turns at like 45mph. i would NEVER do that in my TSX, because it wouldn't be able to handle it, even with the foot off the throttle. i recognize that part of it was the 19" wheels and the fatter tires, but even so, my body stayed in place throughout the turn in the BMW, and the car held its line perfectly. living in northern virginia, i have taken rides in 325s, 330s, and M3s, and this characteristic (although not as extreme as this example) is generally how i perceive BMW handling.

the TSX has significant body roll, although i do like that it'll lean a bit and then stay put throughout a turn. it certainly doesn't feel sloppy; it just doesn't feel like a BMW.

i'll take honda reliability over BMW maintenance anyday, though!

CRacing

I owned a 2003 RSX, I would say TSX's handling is better than RSX especially for cornering.

vidgamer

Once I got some really sticky tires on my Prelude, it cornered great. Thought about improving the suspension, but it seemed good enough not to bother.

Then, I get the TSX, and the stock tires really aren't so great (as far as grip, as someone mentioned). I look forward to getting some real sticky tires and seeing how things improve.

Whoa, I call "unfair"on this one! The M3 is pretty expensive, and has some major upgrades. Talk about apples and oranges....

What I want to see is more comparison of TSXs with the A-Spec suspension to the BMW models with or without the sport suspension. (Comparing to an M3 doesn't sound too practical to me, although I think we all can appreciate a great sports car on its own merits.)

(I'd suggest aftermarket suspension comparisons, but then someone would complain that it wouldn't be fair to compare factory to aftermarket.... Although, I think that, too, would be fair on some level, considering the price difference between the cars!)

JK5one3

i just came from a rsx-s as well, dont get auto. trust me, you will miss the 6speed. i will say it again, GET 6MT. i hated the morning traffic with my rsx-s but its not like your driving in traffic all the time. im already looking to trade my auto for a 6MT.

frescagod

i brought that up as an example; i'm saying, ALL BMWs use Mac struts, and that one example is the one that sticks out in my head. two of my buddies own a stock 325 and a 330ci, and they definitely handle better than my TSX, while providing about the same amount of ride comfort. you completely missed the point of my story, which was that properly tuned, mac struts can be "superior" (subjective, i know) to our TSX's double-wishbone.

in fact, most of you on this board love it when someone places the TSX in the same category as a 325. i don't think comparing our TSX to a 3-series is apples and oranges, although it is apples and oranges if you're talking about the front suspension setups..... looks like i brought out the defending TSX fanatics.

Actuary

Yesterday, I tried to out turn an RSX-S at 40MPH

Phew... TL was leaning hard

vidgamer

That's fine, but it is worth pointing out the difference between an M3 and a standard BMW! I think we can get consensus that the M3 and TSX are not in the same ballpark not just in handling or speed but in price.

Most of the time, though, it seems to be unclear if it's "standard" BMWs with the sport suspension packaged compared to the standard TSX. I would think the final verdict shouldn't be out until you have the opportunity to compare with a slightly more level playing field.

I've never obsessed about mac vs. double-wishbone. But it's clear that you can tune the shocks/struts for different uses, and going slightly stiffer can make a big difference.

One person posted that with the A-spec suspension, he felt that the ride was better (I guess coz it was more composed even over bumps?). So, subjectively, others have said the same thing about the TSX.

This is why I think a comparison between an A-spec TSX and 3-series would be the better comparison.

And while your M3 example shows the good handling, it probably isn't fun on a bumpy road. Just like other cars with stiffer suspensions. (In other words, you mention the handling on the M3, but then mention the comfortable ride of the normal 3-series....)

I'm a fanatic? I do enjoy this car! But no, I'll have to get a lot more fanatical before becoming a BMW owner, I'd think.

I think it's fine to compare TSX and 3-series, and didn't say otherwise. I think comparing to the M3 is silly, though.

My previous car was a Prelude, which C&D called the best handling car short of an M3. I definitely can feel the difference between the Prelude and the TSX. But the Prelude is an example of what you can do with FWD. Maybe even double-wishbone. I mean, think about that -- if you can make a FWD comparable to not just the 3-series, but the M3, that has got to say something.

I think they gave the TSX a softer suspension than the BMWs, because most (average) people are going to enjoy it that way. More people are going to use this car as a people-hauler than some other cars, such as the RSX.

A tighter suspension (and better tires!), and I think the comparison would be a lot closer. The A-spec suspension is not widely publicized, though, where the BMW sport-suspension (which costs more!) is a more common option.

frescagod

THE ENTIRE POINT OF MY INITIAL POST WAS THAT DOUBLE WISHBONE IS NOT THE BE ALL, END ALL OF FRONT SUSPENSION in production/passenger cars. you obviously missed that because you took the M3 comment and ran with it. i used it as an example. BMWs utilize struts, they handle better than our beloved TSX, and frankly, it's a more enjoyable driving experience as well. i would take a 325 over my TSX if their reliability and maintenance costs were equal.

i agree. my point was that mac struts can outperform a double-wish setup, in both handling and comfort. i suppose next you'll say that since i prefer BMW, i'm a complete prick or something.

CGTSX2004

iTrader: (1)

No, but you're a complete moron for putting that last sentence in.

absolude

If you compare the RWD with struts against FWD with double wishbones it may have the better in handling.
Struts are fine for RWD because the front wheels are doing the steering only.
Not the same for FWD where the front wheels take huge load from the engine.
If you have the same chassis and a option of struts or wishbones, the wishbones will be better, at least for hard core racing.
Chassis is also very important, as all the stress from the suspension has to go somewhere. With a great chassis FWD can have good handling, like the Mini.

And then again, TSX kicks BMW ass in SCCA, while the RSX lost WITH the same engine!!!

frescagod

i'm a moron? nice. is that your way of flexing your moderating muscle?

CGTSX2004

iTrader: (1)

spotch

I have a pretty strong feeling that if BMW put as much time and money into developing a double wishbone system for their 3 series as they did with the mac strut setup the car would handle better at similar comfort levels.


I drove the e46 325 (05 model) and the handling didn't really do it for me. It didnt have upgraded tires or suspension or anything, just the base suspension. Didn't seem all that special to me.

sauceman

Last I have seen, he didn't threaten you. You pay to play.

sauceman

It's just a question that the suspension setup in the TSX isn't as aggressively tuned as the BMW setup. Just do the simplest modification like adding a thicker sway bar and see the whole difference it does to the dynamics of the TSX handling.

I believe frescagod's statement is unfair in that it doesn't take into account the state of tune of both cars' suspension setup. You probably couldn't improve a lot more (as easily) on the Bimmer while there's a lot more you could do (easily) to the TSX. Also, there's no accounting for BMW's 50/50 weight bias which has nothing with mac strut setup or double wishbone setup.

aaronng

I suspect that they use Mac struts up front because they require the compactness of that suspension system in order to maintain enough engine bay space to accomodate engines as large as a 3.0L I6. Have you seen the difference in the front half of a 3 series compared to a 3.0L I6 with double wishbones up front? The Supra has a damn long and wide front.

I have no doubts that in the case of 3 series vs TSX that mac struts can outhandle double wishbones up front. It's because the potential of the double wishbones in the TSX has not been maximised. Stock vs stock, the mac struts in the 3 has more attention put into its development and thus handles better. If you went with good dampers in the TSX, you could exceed the handling of the 3 series.

In Australia, the Accord Euro/TSX, Mazda6, and 330ci (all stock) handling performance was compared. They had wet and dry skidpan lateral G measurements, as well as transient G estimation in both the wet and dry where they used a half mile long slalom track for the dry test and a series of cones spaced 46 feet apart for the wet. Here are the results:

Dry lateral G skid pad:
TSX/Accord Euro: 0.831 G
330ci: 0.832 G
Mazda6 2.3L: 0.886 G

Wet lateral G skid pad:
TSX/Accord Euro: 0.806 G
330ci: 0.781 G
Mazda6 2.3L: 0.818 G

Dry slalom time taken:
TSX/Accord Euro: 56.68 sec
330ci: 54.48 sec
Mazda6 2.3L: 54.37 sec

Wet slalom time taken:
TSX/Accord Euro: 25.49 sec
330ci: 24.60 sec
Mazda6 2.3L: 24.39 sec

As you can see, the 3 series did outhandle the TSX. But the Mazda6 beat both of them! My guess is that with the TSX, Acura poured money into the engine and interior, while Mazda poured money into the suspension (and gave a shitty inline4 engine and average interior) and BMW put money into the engine, suspension and interior (in that order).

So the suspension of the 3 series is better tuned than the TSX. But if you pour enough money into double wishbones, you can get even a base model Mazda6 to exceed the handling of a 330ci! It is the budget allocated for suspension, rather than the suspension type that gives the 3 series better handling than the TSX.

Dan Martin

That review doesn't mention what tires were used. If they were the stock michelins, there's no question that the TSX will be slow.

frescagod

yep, i tried to edit my last post like.....6 minutes after posting to mention that i wasn't taking 50/50 weight distro into account, but it wouldn't let me. and i would agree that the compactness of the struts is advantageous due to the I-6 in BMWs instead of V6s.

i just wanted to say that i've driven cars with struts that outperform my TSX. but, there are a million variables that go into which is advantageous to use, etc, so i will just leave it at that.

frescagod

who said anything about budgets? my whole point (as you'll see in my original post) was that if you tune struts properly, they can perform as well or outperform the TSX. i never mentioned money or anything, but the past 3 or 4 of you have brought it into the equation, kind of like how some previous people stated that "the TSX's interior is so much better than the RSX" even though we were only talking about suspension. i'm guessing you don't work for either BMW or Honda, so you're also just speculating, although i'd probably agree with you.

i've owned a 2004 RSX for a full year, and now a TSX for 4 months. the fun driving factor is almost the same to me, but i miss the whole "cockpit" feeling of the RSX....the thicker steering wheel, the gauges/controls aimed specifically towards my eyes, etc. and of course, i could mod the RSX to handle better than my TSX

aaronng

Silly me, I forgot to add in the tyre specs. Tyres were OEM, and usually in Australia they give you summer tyres for all cars.
TSX/Accord Euro: Bridgestone Potenza 225/45 R17
BMW 330ci: Dunlop Sp Sport 8000 225/45 R17
Mazda6 2.3L: Bridgestone Turanza ER30 205/55 R16

So the 16" tyres with only 205 width beat the wider and lower profile tyres on the Accord Euro and 330ci.

aaronng

LOL, 95-99% of us don't work for Honda/Acura, so we are all speculating. But isn't speculating fun? It lets us have a good and fiery discussion... until someone who works for Honda/Acura actually comes in and douse the discussion fire with the cold hard truth.

I'm talking about stock cars and by budget I mean BMW and Acura's budget when designing the TSX and 3-series. Of course, if you are considering only suspension performance, then you can tune macpherson struts to a higher level than double wishbones. Then again, you can tune double wishbones to be better than that superior-tuned mac struts. It's a never ending debate. My comparison was for stock cars from the factory, no suspension mods. If Acura had decided to charge everyone an additional $1000 over the current TSX price for a better suspension tuning, then I speculate that they could exceed the suspension of a 3-series.

I nearly bought the Integra Type R here after getting in to it at the motorshow and getting a feel of the cockpit. It's so nice! Too bad I couldn't justify the additional US$13320 that it cost over the Accord Euro. Integras are expensive here, and the 3-series actually costs twice that of the Accord Euro. Yes, the 325i base model without leather costs US$51800 here.......

frescagod

holy crow. $52,000 for a leatherless 325? insane.

i owned a 1991 'teg, and it seemed to handle better than my RSX. maybe it was the lower center of gravity....?

aaronng

Oops, I meant to say moonroof instead of leather. This is without the sports suspension and bodykit too. If you add the sports package, then it is an additional US$3300 on top. Add in rego, dealer ripoff costs and that's an additional US$2200 as well. So the 325i base model will cost US$54200 and sports package model US$57500 for the manual on the road (final total). And did I mention that the 325i E90 here is still a true 2.5L I6 engine, and not a detuned 3.0L I6?

Wisc Badger

this is old but its funny cause i just cant get over the rsx -s i traded in for my new tsx... handling is a bit better but thats not to say it was bad in the rsx. i just wish the tsx had the same power to weight ratio as the rsx did... then it would clearly be the better of the two.

Wisc Badger

wow i didnt notice HOW old this thread was

aaronng

Wait til you get some Tein Flex or Monoflex on your TSX.