yantastic

My 09 shawd tl was in the shop and was given a regular 2012 tl. The experience is quite disappointing as the tl and shawd driving experience is vastly different.

The regular tl had a ton of torque steer when I floored it. The shawd had virtually none. In corners the tl felt alot less stable, I was definately scared to do turns that I normally wouldn't be scared to do in the shawd. The back also spun out various times.

It may be just me but the steering wheel was thinner. And it most definately felt lighter and uninspiring. The engine is good, but less willing to move than the 3.7. And the exhuast in the shawd is much more throatier..

It does have nice interior still and better gas mileage, not by much. Averaged 28 MPG highway vs shawd 23-24 MPG hw. The ride was definately softer but that's not always a bad thing. The 2012 also muffled the interior engine sound but the 3.5 may also have attributed to that

All in all, the regular tl shouldn't be called a sports sedan. Im glad i got the shawd version. The shawd definstely does deserve to be called a sports sedan and is another story.

Do most of you guys have similar experience?

Edward'TLS

This is exactly why Acura said it wouldn't release a 4G TL-S at all because the 4G AWD was equivalent to the TL-S trim.

eazy

iTrader: (8)

The FWD 4G basically is the type S. Same engine and all except different chassis . AWD is another beast

types1fan

Yep I'm am feeling the difference between the FWD that I had and the AWD that I own.

yantastic

agreed. i find it hard to nitpick the AWD. it handles amazingly well and unbelievably stable in turns, high speeds, or high speed turns . i wish the AWD had additional power while maintaining same MPG.

012TL-GLM

I've never driven a FWD TL, went straight to the SH-AWD on my new car search last October and was sold 10 minutes into the test drive

Edward'TLS

In other words, the 3G TL-S becomes the 4G FWD TL, and the "4G TL-S" is the 4G AWD TL.

Everything has gone one step up, which is good.

Booya4139

My last car was a Honda civic Si with the Honda factory performance sport suspension, progress rear sway bar and uhp tires. I now have a fwd tech w the crap moon rover mxm4 17"

Where I could take an on ramp at 55 and feel very stable I'd need to take it at 40 now. The cars steering is responsive. It amply handles the tasks of a DD, I wouldn't call it a sports sedan. It's more a blend of power comfort and performance. I would rate comfort as its highest attribute. The SH-AWD takes a knock in comfort for a bump in performance and power.

My Si had the full aftermarket intake/exhaust and was professionally tuned. Fun little peppy car to drive but awful in traffic and awful on the imperfect northeastern roads I drive on. This influenced my choice to err on the side of comfort. To each their own

yantastic

how much hp/tq was your si putting to the wheels? and was there a ton of oversteer taking off from a stand still? im wondering if some fwd can distribute power to the wheels better or if they're all just bad

Edward'TLS

^^^^^

FWD vehicles with small displacement engines are usually better because of less torque output, and thus less torque steer effect.

yantastic

my question still remains, are there cars (>200hp) that have minimal or no torque steer despite being FWD? i read somewhere that the GTI has almost no torque steer or something like that. not sure if i believe that

dwest1023

The fwd tl is a sports sedan in my book. I rented a Chrysler 200, and that was a piece of crap. Hit a bump and the car seemed to jump in the next lane. Made me really appreciate my tl fwd.

silverrevlis

I think thats why VW has yet to push the torque levels very far above 200. GM has a system called "HiPer Strut" that is supposed to ward off torque steer that I have heard performs pretty well on the Regal GS, and that car has 295ft lbs TQ. That torque steer is an additional reason I opted for the SW-AWD also.

Booya4139

Tq steer only happens out of a dig at wide open throttle... it is really an overblown issue unless you are tracking it or driving obnoxiously... in DD conditions you will rarely ever encounter tq steer.

Booya4139

The car stock put out roughly 180/139 WHP/TQ out of a 2.0 DOHC engine that made 197 HP at the flywheel.

After tuning and everything i was making just shy of 220 wheel HP and 160 TQ.

You could enduce Tq steer by drag racing it with the pedal slammed to the floor, but its really only specific conditions you would ever encounter it..

Maybe I am missing the boat in thinking that people don't buy a 3700 lb full size car like a TL to drag race and pretend racecar.

Its a luxury touring vehicle.

justnspace

iTrader: (1)

look at OP's age.


Drag race central.

Booya4139

Good catch...

Like I've said elsewhere, go buy a G37xS if you want to mash the go pedal and play racecar...

With that said, I wish they had incorporated the previous gen's TL-S LSD, but understand the difference in handling between that and the SH-AWD wouldn't have enough differentiation...

Having the progress RSB on my Si, i might be the guinea pig to slap one on the FWD TL and see how it plants the rear end.. on the Si the stability difference was very noticeable.

justnspace

iTrader: (1)

I have the progress bar on my 3G TL. it tightened it up, quite nicely!!

kingjoker

eazy, love your side mount for the license plate, I've been looking for a good one, where did you get yours.

turbo_oxide

I half agree. I'm 3G/4G biased depending on how big boy i feel that day. On paper, if you're comparing strictly numbers and specs, 3G TL-S is similar to the 4G Base. (Displacement, drive-train, etc). But IMO, it's kinda comparing apples and oranges between 3G and 4G. I feel like 4G (both base/sh-awd) is a classier more refined big brother of the 3G and less of a sports sedan (younger more rebellious, if you will).

I think it's inevitable that they had to switch drivetrains when approaching 300 hp+. Love SH-AWD, but still have to lean towards the TL-S when I want a fun and tight ride. Hate the torque steer on the TL-S, but as a "sports" car, I'm not a fan of the girthy steering wheel and fluffy suspension on the 4G SH-AWD. Just my

yantastic

i wouldn't drag race in a car that does 0-60 in 6.3-6.5 seconds. hence, i don't. unless highway merging counts. LOLOLIPOPS

i was thinking about the G37x but the suspension is too stiff for me. shawd seemed to be sweet spot for me in terms of comfort/handling.

gokhanturk

i don't think the 0-60 times you stated above are correct.

yantastic

About low six seconds then I persume

Edward'TLS

When I was that age, I modded the hell out of my 2-door Integra :

cold-air intake, enlarged throttle body, header, exhaust, computer chip, adjustable shocks, lowering springs, sway bars, light-weight wheels, super-sticky tires, short-throw shifter, momo steering wheel, .....

It's really a pity that the 4G TL has a very limited list of aftermarket performance parts.

Pseudomaniac

iTrader: (1)

My 3G Type-S is as quick if not quicker than my stock 09 SH-AWD. Much lighter on its feet than the 4G too - but it's a smaller and lighter car.

Nothing wrong with the 4G TL FWD. It's a high power FWD car - and if anything, just as quick on a straight run as the SH-AWD.

justnspace

iTrader: (1)

I dont know why you're lying or trying to cover up, because WE ALL KNOW THAT YOU DO.


hell, i'm not even out of that stage yet.
I drag race teh hell out of my 3G 6MT.

pimpin-tl

My VW was tuned and had no TORQUE Steer on my GTI 2011 I had. It was making around 250 hp and 280 tq. That was the first FWD car I ever drove that had no torque steer with that much power. They have programs in the ECU that prevents TORQUE steer already.

gokhanturk

With the new 6 speed transmission, the car def does not feel like it takes low 6's to hit 60.

RIneuron

2009 Acura TL SH-AWD 0-60 mph 5.4
2010 Acura TL SH-AWD (manual) 0-60 mph 5.2 Quarter mile 13.7
2012 Acura TL SH-AWD 3.7 V6 0-60 mph 5.4

Edward'TLS

Only the 4G TL equipped with manual tranny can achieve a sub-6sec 0-60 time.

Not even the 6AT can bring the 2012 TL under 6 secs.

Hapa DC5

How hard was the OP driving that the back spun out? You pulling the e-brake on these turns? it aint no hachi-roku.

winstrolvtec

The SH AT's don't brake torque so even though it may have enough power to weight to essentially mimic the type of acceleration performance a similar sub 6 sec car has, with traps also in line, it won't be represented in 0-60 times.

It simply lacks the ability to "cheat" those few tenths of a sec off the line or get as effective a rolling start. However, I don't believe the use of any kind of launch is cheating, just using the word to better describe it.

I'm not sure what any TL is ultimately capable of doing and depending on a multitude of factors but the 5AT has tested 0-60 in 5.9 in a R&T comparo with the VW CC. I would imagine that a 6AT SH added to that comparo instead with the same exact conditions, factors, and variables would be good for a little better (and still keeping in mind both with no effective launch).

Now I don't kow how reliable that info is or how consistent it can be replicated, I'm just pointing out that this data, or maybe call it evidence, does exist.

Edward'TLS

R&T (Oct 2009) : 2009 TL SH-AWD 5AT, 0-60 = 6.3 sec.

http://www.roadandtrack.com/tests/ca..._sh-awd_page_2

Motor Trend (July 2009) : 2009 TL SH-AWD 5AT, 0-60 = 6.5 sec.

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...n/viewall.html

Motor Trend (Jun 2011) : 2012 TL SH-AWD 6MT, 0-60 = 5.3 sec.

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...t/viewall.html

Edmunds (Nov 2008) : 2009 TL SH-AWD 5AT, 0-60 = 6.7 sec.

http://www.insideline.com/infiniti/g...7-journey.html

pimpin-tl

Nice. Now show me a 6at one.

[/I][/I]

pimpin-tl

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...-sh-awd-review

6.2 6AT

winstrolvtec

^ I think that is about the only official 6AT test ever done by a major publication so the sampling is a little limited. And to make matters worse, there was another C&D that got 6.0 seconds flat for an 09 SH.

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...-awd-road-test

And the R&T 5.9 I mentioned earlier:

http://www.roadandtrack.com/tests/co...4motion_page_4

Personally, I don't care enough to make it an issue but I also wouldn't take sub 6 seconds (even for the 5AT) off of the table.

Edward'TLS

Going back, when Acura released the 2000 TL with the new 5AT, it claimed that it was 0.5sec faster in 0-60 than the 1999 TL with the 4AT. The 1999 and 2000 TL's were basically identical cars, with the tranny being the only exception.

And now with the 2009 (5AT) and 2012 (6AT), I'm really interest in finding out how much faster, if any, the 2012 is against the 2009.

Hardly any major publication has done a full test review on the 2012 TL. In fact, some publications even deliberately left out the 2012 TL in their comparison tests. It seems like the auto market has lost interest in the 4G TL.

yantastic

Solution: perform scientific test with acurazine members having a 09 shawd sample and 12 shawd sample on an appropriate medium. Preferably smooth tarmac

Booya4139

I hear you. Cars have attributes, people ave specific desires. A car is ultimately a compilation of its parts if it's not German, Swedish or English. Different strokes for different folks

NOX 3.2

FWD >> SH-AWD AT >> SH-AWD 6MT

Three different cars, 6MT AWD being the sportiest and more powerfull