Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Acura TSX

1…3233353738…99

Comments

  • musicman12musicman12 Member Posts: 10
    For me there are couple of reasons why the TSX is an option for me and the Accord coupe isn't.

    First, if you want 4 doors...

    Second, I'm not positive, but I think an Accord V6 EX coupe with the manual has an MSRP higher than the TSX (maybe somewhere in the 27s?). If you don't want the 6 speed, then you can get an LX for a bunch less.

    Third, there is much more headroom in the TSX. I simply don't fit in most Honda cars. I don't fit in the coupe EX V6 with the 6 speed (with standard sunroof), but that might not be a problem for you.

    The TSX, I seem to remember, has more trunk space.

    The TSX has more (perhaps unnecessary) features like stability control, xenon headlights, and dual zone climate control.

    The Acura will likely be slightly better quality in general (along with a longer warranty and the likelihood of a higher resale value).

    Finally there's the styling. I prefer the TSX to the Accord coupe.

    These are all basically personal preference and the price is probably pretty close, so if you like the idea of having a 2-door with that styling and don't mind giving up a few of the features and a year of the warranty, go for the Honda. I'm sure you'll love it--it'll be much faster than the TSX and a good handler without all the fluff. As for me, I like the fluff (and 4 doors).
  • varmintvarmint Member Posts: 6,326
    "My take on the above is that some of us start behaving as if we need to defend every inch of the TSX or any other Acura, at any cost, regardless of the merits on the other side."

    My take is that some of us are behaving as if we need to attack every inch of the TX. Actually, I see both. And I'm getting tired of the repetition.
  • gee35coupegee35coupe Member Posts: 3,387
    And the funny thing is they attack it with nothing to compare it to. I mean I'd understand if the argument was like "this car is better than the TSX because" argument but the B-fest that goes on in here is laughable. All the time talking about either the TSX doesn't have enough engine or too much equipment. Give me a friggin break.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    My take on the above is that some of us start behaving as if we need to defend every inch of the TSX or any other Acura, at any cost, regardless of the merits on the other side.

    I don't see anything wrong with defending something, as long as some of us do nothing but attack it, often with misinformation, and worse, without a perspective.

    *Weight* is the killer of performance, and this certainly seems to be the case with the dimensionally *small* TSX.

    Again, let us work with a perspective. A BMW 525 is barely larger than TSX, yet weighs about 3450 lb. with 5-speed manual (3494 lb. w/auto). While BMW 325, a smaller car than TSX, weighs just over 3300 lb. with auto transmission, adding options might actually make it a little porkier.

    So, what is it that is adding weight to certain cars, if not all?
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    Accord EXV6/6-speed Coupe (MSRTP: $25,900) is probably the closest alternative to Acura TSX (MSRP: $26,460) and very reasonably priced, i.e. if you don't mind giving up two doors. That said, the 6-speed is a rare offering so I'm not sure how easy it would be to find one with a deal tag attached to it.

    Accord Coupe/6-speed is also the only Accord trim to come with Sport Suspension, although I'm not sure if it is about as aggressively tuned as TSX, only a side by side drive will tell the story.

    The only add ons above the coupe that TSX has are xenons, stability control, better stereo and some interior upgrades. If 2-doors and the upgrades don't matter as much, and you want 6-speed, Accord Coupe appears to be a better alternative over most mainstream to near luxury offerings including Mazda6s, Altima 3.5SE, Audi A4, 325, 9-3, TSX etc.

    However, if you don't get 6-speed, then you also give up sport package. And if THAT is not required, TSX need not be considered in the first place unless exclusivity is desired.
  • merc1merc1 Member Posts: 6,081
    But don't you think the majority of TSX's will be sold with the automatic?

    M
  • musicman12musicman12 Member Posts: 10
    Thanks for the correction in the MSRP of the Accord coupe. Maybe I was remembering the price with the navigations system?
  • himilerhimiler Member Posts: 1,209
    Regardless of your disagreement with any criticism of the TSX for its lack of power or bloated sticker, the opinion of most who have *driven* the car find both complaints to be essentially true.

    For your benefit, here are cars I would opine to be a better value than the TSX:
    Mazda 6 (i or s)
    WRX
    Accord Sedan (I4 or V6)
    Nissan Altima (V6)

    If you'd like to compare "luxury brands," the question of value becomes more subjective (which is a fundamental part of the TSX's problem). You have to factor in performance and equipment levels, and determine as an individual what motivates you to purchase one car instead of many others.

    I have tried to be objective in regards to the TSX -- I drove it and was able to appreciate many of its charms. But, just because people are left scratching their heads as to why it doesn't offer the kind of driving experience or value that its billing would suggest, it doesn't mean we're having a "B-fest" about it, whatever your "friggin" perception may be.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    But don't you think the majority of TSX's will be sold with the automatic?

    Yes. Acura estimates that 30% of the buyers will choose 6-speed manual over the 5-speed auto. This is actually a better percentage than most other offerings with manual. For example, Mazda6s and Accord Coupe EXV6 with manual transmissions are projected at only 5%.

    That said, if we were to compare auto to auto between Accord EXV6 and TSX, the gap gets wider, since Honda does not come with Sport Package, the Acura does. If that differentiation is desired, TSX is a better value and car. If not, Accord EXV6 can't be beat (and IMO, by any car in the mid-20s).

    That said,
    Acura TSX: Better handler, smaller and better equipped
    Honda Accord EXV6: More Power, family size and value Priced.

    In terms of ownership costs it will be tough to beat the king, Accord, anyway.

    BTW, although TSX and Accord share the automatic transmission (the only difference is in the third and fourth gear where TSX has shorter gearing), the Acura offers Sport Shift. Now, Sport Shift didn't really give full control to the driver in the past, but that has apparently changed with TSX. The transmission will keep the gear the driver chooses to, something that can't be achieved in Accord or other Sport Shifts from the past. Just wanted to point out something I have read.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    I mean I'd understand if the argument was like "this car is better than the TSX because" argument

    I understand what you mean, and it amuses me.

    All the time talking about either the TSX doesn't have enough engine or too much equipment.

    That is another thing I don't understand. Some people are just too passionate about a car that they don't like for certain reasons. If 200 HP on a 3300 lb. car is too little these days, I wonder what that would mean to 98-02 Accord V6, BMW 325 or Audi A4/1.8T.
    Based on my experience, TSX has more than enough power. If some people disagree, I can only suggest them to move on.
  • akal50akal50 Member Posts: 112
    I think you'll always find Acura apologists who take criticism of Acura too personally. I'm a big fan of Honda/Acura, but I can admit when Honda has made mistakes. The problem is there are some people who can't. They not only defend every decision Honda makes, they start attacking people who criticize Honda.

    As for the TSX, I don't have a problem with the fact that it's a Euro Accord with an Acura badge slapped on it. After all, the Lexus GS300 started out as a Toyota model only sold in Japan. Then they put a Lexus name on it and sent it to the U.S. A price increase is expected since you're paying for the name brand. The mistake that Acura made with the TSX is that they didn't give it a strong enough engine. I don't buy all the excuses about how a V6 won't fit or it'll make the car too heavy. I think the real reason Acura didn't offer a V6 is cause they're worried it'll affect sales of the TL. They know that a lot of people who buy the TL do so mainly for the power and handling. These people don't need a big car or all the extra luxury features. So if you give em a smaller TL for less money, they'll take it. That's what Acura is afraid of. The solution to this problem is simple, but one that Acura will never do. Offer a V8 in the TL. That way people who just want the power and handling in a small car can get the TSX, people who like the TSX but wish it were bigger can get the TL with the V6, and people who want a midsize luxury sedan with lots of power can get the TL with the V8. This is how it's done with BMW and Audi. Acura's refusal to use a V8 engine is what's hurting it and the TSX is the perfect example of that.
  • bravedavebravedave Member Posts: 100
    ... may work in rear wheel drive applications, but would pose serious problems in a FWD car. The only way this could work well would be to have an all-wheel drive option. This will alleviate problems of extra weight on the front end which would affect handling and also reduce possibility of torque steer. Think of a current Caddy DeVille or Lincoln Continental, and you get the idea.

    BUT-- if Acura were to integrate a high powered V6 on the front axle complemented by an electric hybrid system on the rear, with a high torque capacity CVT, now that would be interesting :)
  • jjgittesjjgittes Member Posts: 54
    I just saw a huge glossy 2 page ad in a magazine for the TSX. I thought it was interesting the ad did not mention that it had a 4 cyl. engine, nor did it mention the price of the car. I do like the TSX, and would consider buying it, but not at $27k plus that the dealers in my area in So Cal have it priced at. $25k (even) maybe, $27k no way, I'll drop back down to a Honda or maybe even a heavily discounted 2003 Maxima in the near future when I'm ready to buy.
  • akal50akal50 Member Posts: 112
    I feel bad for the Acura marketing people. They have to promote a car that's all about performance and yet they can't really mention the engine. I don't think any of the commercials I've seen have mentioned the engine or price. I wonder why? If I didn't know anything about the TSX and saw one of those commercials, I'd just assume it had a V6.

    As for the V8, I understand the difficulties involved. I'm simply speaking from a marketing standpoint. There are a lot of people who won't even consider the RL cause they see no V8 in the spec list. I think the same problem will happen with the TSX. People will see the commercial and get interested, but then when they see the spec list, they might lose all interest.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    "They not only defend every decision Honda makes, they start attacking people who criticize Honda."

    This can be easily rephrased to something like this,
    "They not only defend every decision Honda makes, they start criticizing people who attack Honda."

    But, playing with words is not going to get us anywhere. Unfortunately, I've seen too many tag lines in this forum labeling people, who disagree with all the criticism that TSX receives, as alienating others. We can talk all day about attack and defense, but let us get back to the topic.

    I don't see TSX affecting the sales of TL as an issue for Honda/Acura. They would be selling one of their cars and can easily switch production to the one that maintains greater demand.
    A few of the main issues with TSX, that have been raised so far, are,
    MSRP: $26,460 (High); Curb Weight: 3230 lb./6-speed manual) or 3318 lb./5-speed auto (High); Power: 200 HP (Low).

    To give this a perspective, let us consider Accord
    EX-L: $23,800; Curb Weight: 3166 lb.; Power: 160 HP
    EXV6: $25,800; Curb Weight: 3360 lb.; Power: 240 HP

    It appears that the V6 adds $2K and 200 lb. to the car. If we apply the same to TSX, we should expect, MSRP: $28,500; Curb Weight: 3500 lb.

    Let us now throw in the TL.
    MSRP: $29,000; Curb Weight: 3500 lb.

    Two cars, from one brand, with about the same heft and power for the same price does not make sense to me. TL would have a slight edge in cabin size (96 cu. ft compared to 91 cu. ft) and TSX would have sport package, the only difference between the two cars.

    On the other side, there is the entry level car for Acura,
    RSX: $20,000 - $23,000 (base to loaded base)
    RSX-S: $23,500
    Then there is,
    TSX: $26,500 ($3K more than RSX-S)
    And,
    TL: $29,500 ($3K more than TSX)
    And there may be,
    TL-S: $32,500 ($3K more than TL)

    And more likely than not, Acura will pull RL into a price class it really belongs, starting in the upper $30K range. This is based on a simple logic, whether people agree with it or not.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    akal50,
    I don't think Acura is targeting people whose car purchase is about cylinder count. Ads are about getting the attention and pulling people to the showrooms.

    As far as V8 is concerned, the need is exaggerated. Cars offered with V8 as an option don't do well in the market. The six-cylinder version sells and carries the car. Cars like BMW 525/530 versus 540 and Lexus GS300 versus GS430 are excellent examples.

    The RL weakness is about its relatively higher price tag. There is nothing to brag about the power train either. The car needs repositioning, much like Acura did with TL with MY1999 and Lexus did it with GS, also in MY1999. It appears, Acura may be heading in the same direction with the RL. A full size RL, loaded to the brim, with 3.5 liter V6 pumping 260 HP will be more than enough to keep up with the competition in sub-40K price class.

    And if Acura can deliver a sport trim with 300 horses or more, with AWD in low-mid 40s, using IMA or not with the 3.5 liter V6, the need for performance would be addressed.
  • markjennmarkjenn Member Posts: 1,142
    Robertsmx does a good analysis.

    I think most people who want the V6 assume they can get it without "paying for it" where the payment is:

    + More weight
    + More front-end bias
    + More torque steer
    + More FWD traction issues
    + More cost
    + More gas

    The STRENGTH of the TSX is the 4-cyl. It is the same thing that makes a CR-V more desirable than a V6 Ford Escape. It is the same thing that makes a 6-cyl M3 more desirable than a V8-powered Corvette. If you're biased towards wanting more power and are willing to pay the price, the TSX isn't a great choice.

    Sure, if Honda could put a 240-hp V6 in the TSX and nothing else would change, I'd take it. But they can't. Cars are compromises.

    Now you can pull a piece of data here and there out of context and attempt to show that Honda should be able to pull a rabbit out of its hat and produce a V6-powered TSX that is just as light, just as cheap, just as "whatever" as the current car. But it's not the reality of the TSX. If Honda would have produced a V6 TSX within the constraints of a few years ago when this design was made, it would have had these compromises.

    There is nothing wrong with wanting a V6 in the TSX. But I gotta ask: If you're willing to make the tradeoffs, then a current TL or Mazda 6s is available right now.

    My only real grip is that the price is about $1K out of line with what I would expect Honda could build this thing for and make a decent profit. Somehow, we got all the benefits of the 4-cyl except the 4-cyl price. There's nice content and fit/finish, so I'm fine with a premium, bu the premium is just a tad out of line. (Even this could be taken care of for my car if they simply didn't ream six-speed buyers by charging them the same price as auto buyers - Honda's margins have to be better on the six-speed.)

    If the market really is that hung up on more power, that will get corrected here pretty quick with discounts. Gotta love the economics of supply/demand. The car will eventually sell for what is it worth to people, one way or the other.

    - Mark
  • varmintvarmint Member Posts: 6,326
    "The car will eventually sell for what is it worth to people, one way or the other."

    Amen. One of the strengths for the TSX is the fact that it offers $30K content for much less. The downside is that you don't get the 6 cyl powerplant that most offer for $30K. Sorry folks, you don't get something for nothing. There have to be compromises.

    It's true that most people won't go for this. There's no question about it. That's why Acura sells the TL. The TSX is not going to replace that car.
  • hunter001hunter001 Member Posts: 851
    One of the strengths for the TSX is the fact that it offers $30K content for much less. The downside is that you don't get the 6 cyl powerplant that most offer for $30K. ?

    The 6-cyl is available in the Honda Accord EX V6, with the car weighing pretty much the same as the smaller TSX and costing less too, with some features like the powered passenger seat etc., that are not available in the TSX (the TSX has a decidedly non-luxury trait of hand cranking the passenger seats). 30K ? The Accord EX V6 MSRP is way less than that and sells for even less money. On top of that, these 2 cars are formed off of the exact same platform.

    Later...AH
  • muscarelmuscarel Member Posts: 22
    I had a quick test drive the other day, and came away quite impressed with the TSX. It runs smooth, is sufficiently quiet, shifted great, and had enough power to make the car fun. I also test drove the Mazda 6s right after my TSX test drive. It drove nice as well, but the TSX just comes across as a much more sophisticated automobile. The 6 is a little rougher around the edges design-wise. The interior is a notch or 2 below the TSX's and it just didn't have the same aura. Would I buy a TSX? - Maybe - although I may cough up the extra $$ to move up to a G35 coupe or maybe the new '04 TL when it comes out.
  • bodble2bodble2 Member Posts: 4,514
    There's talk over at TOV about the new TL being about only 187" in length and debuting in the high 20's price-wise. Where would that leave the TSX?
  • himilerhimiler Member Posts: 1,209
    I believe that would effectively make the TSX another Vigor or 2.5TL -- a dead end.
  • akal50akal50 Member Posts: 112
    robertsmx,

    The analysis you gave above proves my point. A TSX with a V6 would cost $28,500 and weigh 3500 pounds. For an extra $500, you could get a TL which has the same stuff and it's a bigger car. So they could very easily be in competition and I think Acura realized this so they held back on putting a V6 in the TSX.

    Yes, ads are only about getting people interested in your product. That means you only give them enough information to get them interested and leave out anything that might discourage them. Making your car look sporty gets them interested. Telling them it only has 4 cylinders discourages them. Telling them that it's $26,000 only discourages them further.

    markjenn,

    You're right in saying that if you want a V6, you have to be willing to pay for it. But I think when people see the price of the TSX, they feel like they already paid for the V6, at least in terms of dollars. The problem is they didn't get one, which is another way of saying the TSX is overpriced.

    Eventually the market will send a strong signal to Acura. They'll realize you can't ask people to pay 26K for a car with only 4 cylinders and either they'll give it a V6, drop the price, or stop making the car altogether. So if we know things will change, all the more reason not to get a TSX now. Either get a TL or just wait.

    varmint,

    I don't agree that you're getting 30K worth of content. In fact, I don't think you're getting 26K worth of content. For that much money, I expect a V6.
  • akal50akal50 Member Posts: 112
    I read the same stuff over at TOV. I think the high 20s figure is a mistake. Everything I've heard and read says the TL will be in the mid 30s.

    As for the size, 187 is significantly shorter than the current TL's length of 192. I hope the wheelbase doesn't shrink too. The Accord is at 189 and the first generation Legend was 187.
  • bbartlow1bbartlow1 Member Posts: 22
    Guys.... really appreciate all you've done to make this a world class discussion. Best board I have EVER seen.

    Just so you know, I resolved my own indecision on the TSX by buying an EX-L Accord (auto) for $21,000. At that price, how could I not? The EX (auto) was only $19,998.00.

    Sure, the new Accord looks radically different than the old style. But I don't buy Accords for their looks anyway, do you? It's just basic transportation.

    Fortunately, I'll need a second car soon and the TSX is still up there in the "a little more fun and nicer department." But ultimately it comes down to value for me. I can't justify spending 7,000 after tax dollars on "a little" of anything. Maybe that's not a lot of money when you're shopping for an S-class Mercedes... but it's a ton of $$$ when it comes to cars in this price range.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    The 6-cyl is available in the Honda Accord EX V6, with the car weighing pretty much the same as the smaller TSX and costing less too, with some features like the powered passenger seat etc., that are not available in the TSX

    And if you add the features that are in TSX and not in Accord, the EXV6 would have a price tag approaching that of TL.

    the TSX has a decidedly non-luxury trait of hand cranking the passenger seats

    I don't think that would be the first time a near luxury car had manual passenger seats, if that is a make of break deal. Some of them shamelessly come with manual driver seats as well. That said, I'm willing to bet that xenon headlamps are more expensive than adding passenger side power seat.

    There's talk over at TOV about the new TL being about only 187" in length and debuting in the high 20's price-wise. Where would that leave the TSX?

    I have not seen anything official from Acura so it must be speculation. PR mentions TL concept being several inches shorter than the current TL, which could mean 188" or 190", about the same length as the Accord (189.5"). As for pricing, my bet on TL would be $30,000 (w/NAV $32,000). Now, that could mean $29,995 as well (the high 20s). With Sport package etc., if Acura release a TL-S, pricing may be about $32K ($34K w/NAV).

    So, TSX slots right between RSX (loaded base/Type-S) and TL (base) with MSRP of $26,460. Good for attracting 15K buyers per year, while Acura would be glad to move 60-70K TLs they do every year and Honda would handle 400K+ Accords on the other side of the scale. Its about taking your pick.
  • eneg5eneg5 Member Posts: 3
    "Eventually the market will send a strong signal to Acura. They'll realize you can't ask people to pay 26K for a car with only 4 cylinders and either they'll give it a V6, drop the price, or stop making the car altogether. So if we know things will change, all the more reason not to get a TSX now. Either get a TL or just wait."

    You are making a lot of assumptions. You left out one:
    Since Acura is supposedly only going to send over approx 15,000 units, that alone might keep the price at MSRP, or even raise it!
    It's been known to have happened before. . .

    What then??

    Regards,

    Eneg5
  • hunter001hunter001 Member Posts: 851
    Eventually the market will send a strong signal to Acura. They'll realize you can't ask people to pay 26K for a car with only 4 cylinders and either they'll give it a V6, drop the price, or stop making the car altogether.

    I am sorry, but the TSX does not cost 26K....it costs either $26990 (= 27K) or $28990 (= 29K) w/NAV.

    Later...AH
  • hunter001hunter001 Member Posts: 851
    And if you add the features that are in TSX and not in Accord, the EXV6 would have a price tag approaching that of TL.

    I think we should compare the TSX with the 4-cylinder Accord EX-L and not with the 240HP/212lbs/ft Accord EX V6. The V6 takes the EX V6 to a different plane.

    Compared to the Accord EX-L 4-cylinder, the TSX certainly has more features but I don't think the extra money merits that much more, especially with a size downsizing within the same platform. Should cost $2000 more than the Honda Accord EX-L 4-cylinder....not what Honda is actually charging for it.

    Later...AH
  • himilerhimiler Member Posts: 1,209
    Congratulations on your new Accord!
  • akal50akal50 Member Posts: 112
    It may not be entirely fair, but most people will compare the Accord EXV6 and the TSX when they see how close the prices are. The Accord is $25,800. The TSX is $26,490. The TSX has the looks, the more polished interior, the Acura name, the sportiness, Xenon lights, dimming mirror, a better stereo. The Accord has the power, the room, power passenger seat, anti-theft radio, and cheaper on gas. Put the two together and you get a really great car, the new TL. Too bad it'll cost you another 6K.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    Like you mentioned, let us compare Accord EX-L (MSRP: $23,800) to TSX (MSRP: $26,460). The difference in MSRP: $2660.

    Now, we should figure out if TSX has the extras that can justify the price tag compared to the Accord. Here are a few things that TSX has over Accord.
    1. Side Curtain Airbags
    2. Vehicle Stability Assist
    3. Sport Package
    4. Upgraded Audio System
    5. Upgraded Interior (Leather, trim pieces, auto dim rear mirror, home link transmitter, electric trunk etc.)
    6. Xenon Head Lamps
    7. Upgraded Power Train (160 HP versus 200 HP; Sport Shift)
    8. Split Fold rear seats (Accord has single piece fold down)
    9. Additional warranty and Acura TLC

    Let us assume that number 7, 8 and 9 are for free. In cars where sports package is a factory option, the added cost is usually around $1000-$1500. Let us assume $1000.
    Stability Control, Curtain Airbags etc. may add $500 if available as options. I see $500 worth of interior improvements (auto dim mirror, I believe, costs additional $250 in Accord).
    Xenon headlamps can cost $500.

    The additional cost has been accounted for as I see more than $2000 worth of improvement. So, Acura could have offered TSX for the price of Accord EX-L if the additional features/upgrades were bundled into options packages like many other automakers do.
  • varmintvarmint Member Posts: 6,326
    Who said anything about weight? Or are you just posting the automatic game-saying of something negative to refute a positive statement... whether it's relevant or not?

    And you're the one who brought up the EX V6.

    I'm talking about content. HIDs, VSA, Sportshift or 6 speed, 17" rims with V-rated tires, turn signal mirrors, height adustable driver's seat, metallic/leather shifter, door sill trim, auto-dim mirror, a longer warranty, and a 360 watt stereo with 8 eight speakers and an element antenna. (Yeah, I went a little nutty with the comparison tool.)

    Sure the Accord has a slushbox-only V6 without the benefit of Sportshift. It also has that 4-way power passenger's seat you mention in every post regarding content. That Accord has an MSRP of $26,260 (dest. included), which isn't really that far from the TSX. Adding the stereo alone would put these two on par with one another. If you want to compare the MSRP of the TSX with the TMV of the Accord, the Accord still costs $24,339 in my neck of the woods. With those savings, you can buy the stereo and the tire/rim package that are included with the TSX.

    And that's just the quantitative list. The quality and style are not the same. The interiors of both vehicles are very nice, but the TSX is the more stylish of the two. When I sat in the Accord, I thought it was pretty darn spiffy for a family car. It's pretty close to being on par with my TL. But the TSX is better than both.

    Bottom line... the Accord IS a tremendous value. However, that does not prevent other cars from being worth their price tag.

    Hey, an Audi A4 comes in with only 15" tires, cloth upholstery, completely powerless seats, it's missing a 6th gear, and many other features. It does have a full-size spare, a third rear headrest, foglights, and headlight washers, but I've got a feeling that will be small consolation when faced with the asking price. Compare this one with the Accord and see if it does any better than the TSX.
  • varmintvarmint Member Posts: 6,326
    Akal - Show me another car for 27K that gives you the same feature content the TSX offers.
  • akal50akal50 Member Posts: 112
    varmint, the TSX may be loaded with features, but it's missing two features that I expect in a car that's 27K. Cylinders 5 and 6. I'd gladly give up the nav system, the sporty leather, the Xenon lights, and the dimming mirror for that extra engine power.
  • varmintvarmint Member Posts: 6,326
    Then I guess none of the entry lux cars are your cup of tea. What are you doing shopping here?
  • himilerhimiler Member Posts: 1,209
    The VW Passat comes close. It lacks VSC and xenons, but has dual power front seats and a V6 with 209ft-lbs. of torque. TMV pricing is $26,800.

    It likely won't be as much fun to drive thru the twisties, but you were talking features, not performance.

    I'm not currently shopping for a entry-level luxury car. Does that mean I should be excluded from the conversation?
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    himiler,

    I decided to build VW Passat GLS w/1.8T and managed to get the cost to $27,135 for the 3350 lb. sedan with 170 HP/166 lb.-ft. The options I added: Leather, Auto Transmission, homelink and ESP. Compared to this car, TSX is lighter, about the same size (except the trunk), has more features (including sport package) and costs less.

    It likely won't be as much fun to drive thru the twisties, but you were talking features, not performance.
    Using Edmunds I added leather, ESP and homelink to Passat GLS/V6 (since we want to discuss features), and the cost: $29,385 (includes $575 destination). If handling was not an issue, and we ignored the cost associated with it as well as certain features, why even consider TSX? Accord EXV6 will get it done for $3K less with more power (50 horses), torque, less weight and lower gas mileage.
  • varmintvarmint Member Posts: 6,326
    The point is, if you want to remove the luxury content from a luxury car, you're not looking from the same perspective as the buyer. What you want is something else, entirely. It's like saying that the Modena is awfully expensive for car than doesn't have low range and lockers. You're in the wrong frame of mind.

    If you judge the TSX solely by its performance, you are missing half of its value. By the same token, if you judge it solely by its content, you are also missing half of the story.

    In these threads, I see a whole lot of car X is a better performer than the TSX for the same dollar, but it doesn't have the same luxury equipment. Then, when the topic changes to luxury equipment, some other car is better for the dollar, but lacks the performance edge. None of the ones we discuss ad nauseum in this thread offer both in one package at this price.

    Personally, I think that the Passat is the closest. You hit the nail on the head with that one. It's the car that I've had in mind from the beginning. Yet, I don't see the Passat getting the same flack. In fact, it's an award-winning vehicle.
  • himilerhimiler Member Posts: 1,209
    Maybe it's because the Passat is considered more of a "family" sedan that offers the kind of content that is usual for its class, albeit at a price higher than its competition.

    By touting the TSX as a "luxury sports sedan," perhaps Acura has created too high an expectation of the car's abilities.

    In terms of feature content, the TSX is an excellent value. But I am unable to give it credit as a machine that offers a decisive edge in performance over others in its class. Frankly, it is less than adequate for my personal tastes.

    For similar money, I will admit to favoring the 250hp RX-8. It has all the features I want, and genuine performance, too.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    So it boils down to personal expectations. My expectations may have been lower to start with, so I find TSX an excellent value in its class.

    BTW, Top Gear magazine just rated Honda Accord (European) as the best in class.
    "It's been an action packed year on the medium car motorway, with Nissan's Primera being overtaken by the impressive new Mazda6 - which in turn got pipped in the home straight by this, the ever so slightly more impressive new Honda Accord."
  • jaquinojaquino Member Posts: 90
    I know this is the TSX forum, but has anybody seen these pics of the new 2004 TL concept?

    http://hondanews.com/forms/acura/TL/index_images.html?kw=currenta- - - cura

    The new TL looks like a "Supersized" TSX! I like it a lot.

    If Honda does the right thing and price it between 30k-35k, then this should please the folks who want the TSX but wished it had a V6. Since this car will be built in North America, it should keep the costs down while keeping the content up, unlike the TSX which is built in Japan (which is probably why the TSX costs higher than expected).
  • bodble2bodble2 Member Posts: 4,514
    this is just the "concept" TL. Wonder how close to that the production car will be? Also I'm not sure I like the new bumpers. Less bulky, but minor fender-bender will result in damage to grill, trunk lids, etc.

    Is there ANY possibility the new TL will offer AWD, or is that more likely reserved for the RL?
  • bbartlow1bbartlow1 Member Posts: 22
    Excuse me again, gentlemen, I just can't believe how good the talent is in this discussion. Really. So good, in fact, I think most of you could (or DO) work for a car company. (Any shills in the group?) The best of you, of course, would work for Honda/Acura, as they seem best at splitting hairs at the cost of thousands of dollars per follicle.

    FYI: During my recent purchase, I didn't compare the Accord (which I bought) against the TSX directly. They are different cars designed for different markets. I don't try to mix the two, as some seem intent on doing. The boys at Acura depend on what we call an "inelastic demand curve" for certain features -- looks, the Acura nameplate, and sportiness to name a few, while the guys and gals at Honda know that its customers are more value driven. The demand curve for some of the extras isn't nearly as steep -- hence the better value.

    The point is, my friends, don't lose sight of the monetary facts. The further we go 'up market' the MORE we end up paying for incrementally LESS.

    Of course, I'm talking retail here. Have you noticed how these 30 -50K cars get hammered so hard and fast on a resale basis? Not the case with a 20K Honda.

    .. a big (but not always willing to pay the price) Acura fan

    Sponsored by your "Local TSX for $25,000" Committee
  • markjennmarkjenn Member Posts: 1,142
    They included a quote form someone at Acura which basically said that the new TL is going to be very close to the show car, minus a couple esoteric features (forgot which).

    - Mark
  • akumaakuma Member Posts: 70
    Your comparison of the TSX to the 1.8T(and V6) Volkswagen Passat is slightly flawed. The leather package ($1615) includes the cold weather package ($325) so a fully loaded GLS 1.8T with destination costs $26,885 (metallic paint may add a little). However, with the manual transmission, the GLS costs $25,810. The TSX costs $26,990 regardless of transmission type.

    But these numbers (MSRP) don't really mean anything. What really matters is that the TMV of ANY Passat GLS is still less than or equal to the expected TMV of the base TSX ($27,000). Even the GLX V6 5M which already comes fully loaded (ESP the only option) has a TMV of $27,246(automatic adds about $1,100). The GLX has upgraded wheel/tires and basically all the luxury features of the TSX(give or take a few) with about equal interior quality (look and feel anyway).

    So the Passat HAS a V6 and is still comparable or better in price/features to the TSX. Yet what some people fail to see is even with the V6 (and supposedly huge torque advantage albeit a 200 lb. weight disadvantage), the Passat is still a worse performer in just about every way (handling, acceleration, MPG) to the TSX.

    It appears there are at least 2 groups of people. There are those that think a 4-cylinder car for $25,000+ is unacceptable even if for all practical purposes it does all the things a comparable V6 (the Passat's for example) does. They also don't necessarily care for a fully loaded car. They might be better off in a Honda Accord EX-L, 4-cylinder Passat, or Mazda 6i, but they are going to have what i believe is a worse car.

    There are also those that insist on having a 6 cylinder car (and usually RWD or AWD) and are somewhat willing to pay considerably more for it. They may also not care for a fully loaded car. They may be better off buying a BMW 325, Audi 3.0 quattro or Infiniti G35. But those all have a real-world entry cost above and beyond where the TSX ends.

    Finally, there is a third group of people and something tells me that they include the 15,000 people that are going to very pleased and satisfied with the TSX.
  • creakid1creakid1 Member Posts: 2,032
    Woo... The new TL mimics Phaeton's rear door/c-pillar. What's VW gonna do w/ its $100k limo's exclusivity, especially w/ its introductory date in this country possibly no earlier than the new TL's!

    Whether this "Phaeton-like"-detail looks matching on the TL or not, the Phaeton looks heavy, wastefully long & blend by comparison.

    Nicely tall, too. In fact, the crispy-styled TL also looks powerfully muscular as if it wants to "run over" the CTS.

    Expect to discount the TSX soon, starting w/ the auto.
  • jaquinojaquino Member Posts: 90
    The final production car will closely resemble this concept, simply because this car is expected to be available in October. I doubt Acura will do any major changes to the design this late in the game.

    Most likely, the production version wont have those fat wheels or the drilled rotors (brembo looking thingys), but I expect the overall design to look the same. Some folks at ClubTSX.com hint that we are looking at possibly 90% of what the final product will be.

    I dont know if AWD will be available, but Acura will have to eventually go to AWD to remain competitive. There is only so much torque you can put through the front wheels before "Torque Steer" becomes a problem. When (and IF) Infiniti and Lexus decide to put 300+ HP in their V6 cars (both of which offer RWD by the way) then Acura will have to rethink their strategy of offering only FWD sedans.

    Since a lot of folks lament the fact that the TSX is only a four cylinder and with only "adequate torque", the TL might be up the alley. Acura also mentions the new TL will be a couple of inches shorter than the outgoing model, I guess to be sporty and nimble. Certainly not as nimble as the TSX obviously, but worth a look when it comes out.

    One more thing, I sincerely apologize in advance for mentioning the TL in the TSX forum. I just thought the TL looks a lot like the TSX (the front at least). Just bracing myself for the future flames as a result of diverting this thread to another model :)
  • steve_onsteve_on Member Posts: 70
    I second that motion.

    With all due respect to some of the analysis of why there is an $2K extra in the price tag of the new TSX, I submit that much of the discussion is missing the mark. I would submit that most of the added price is associated with the Acura logo and not the features. IMHO.
  • stretchsjestretchsje Member Posts: 700
    ...I've been involved in most of the discussion over the car's engine, and I concluded that while not an overachiever, it certainly is competitive against entry-luxury cars.

    However, while competitive with more expensive entry-luxury cars, it falls far short of mass-market appliance cars such as Honda's Accord. The tradeoff was for handling though- and that's worth it every time, right?

    Well, where'd the weight savings from the engine go? The Accord has mushy handling with the V6, and the TSX does not- every single comment on its ride will claim that it feels taught. Is it the sporty car Acura claims it to be? No! It's a competent, predictable car, but not a sporty car. Steering feel was traded away, and the final car is heavy compared to the lightweight, nimble Acuras of the past.

    So power was compromised in favor of handling, but handling was compromised by weight of its vast amount of standard features. Standard features make the car luxurious, but to give the car a sporty image, its physical size was shrunk to smaller, less luxurious proportions. These proportions were made to make the car feel sporty, which is why it was given a high-revving instead of a v6... which starts the entire "loop of compromise" over again. I'm confused. There is no one area in which the TSX is not competitive. However, I'm confused as to what its mission is, as it compromises in conflicting areas.

    I know why I'd buy a BMW. I know why I'd buy an RX-8. I know why I'd buy a Camry. All these cars have clear missions. I don't know why I'd buy a TSX- its a car full of negated promise, and yet still so good that it can't be dismissed.

    Honestly, the TSX is showing me how good of a value the Accord, '6, Camry, and Altima really are... though value is only in the eye of the beholder.
This discussion has been closed.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles