Acura TSX

1wiseguy

Are you saying that they took pictures of the Euro Accord and doctored them by replacing the "H" with an "A" ?

vtecinfused

Is the backseat really smaller than that of the 6?

robertsmx

Mazda6 is about 3.5" longer than JDM/Euro Accord (and as much as Accord Coupe), and none of the competition uses 5-link rear suspension that can easily eat up cabin/trunk space. Camry benefits the most among these cars since it uses struts all around, not sure about Saab 9-3.

diploid

Who knows...perhaps the seats are higher off the ground so legs won't be splayed out. The Euro Accord does look like it has a rather high belt line.

ickes_mobile

yep, that's what I'm saying...

robertsmx

Side View of the cabin in JDM/Euro Accord.

ickes_mobile

I don't see how the JDM/European car can be narrower than the NA car given the same dash, front door panels, front seats, and center console.

The back seat looks pretty roomy too. I like the middle seat headrest, which isn't in the NA car. The only issue I see looking at the picture is that rear headroom is compromised by the sloped "C" pilar and the rear door openings look small.

heisnstein

I don't think the Euro Accord is narrower than the NA Accord. According to Edmunds, the NA Accord's rear hip room is 53.5 inches.

The side cabin view posted by robertsmx is quite stunning but, if you notice, the rear leg room area is just about front and center in the photo. This suggests that Honda designed the shot in part to show a comfortable rear space and may have moved the front seats up to do so.

I would like to be wrong on this and will wait to see how this all shakes out when the American version is introduced.

varmint

Not to put too fine a point on it, but, if you want a bigger back seat, buy a TL. The TSX is supposed to be the smaller, sportier sedan, not the family hauler.

ickes_mobile

which is a couple inches narrower than the NA car...

diploid

robert- thanks for the pic. The angle of the seats will no doubt prevent anyone from splaying his or her legs, so leg room shouldn't be that much of a problem. Toe room might be another story...this is a small car.

I do see the hassle of getting into the car, though, as the lower back door looks pretty tight.

heisnstein

The TL for sure is the way to go if you gotta have a lot of back space, but I hope Honda realizes, as apparently Saab and Mazda have, that there are a lot of dads out there with a heavy foot, and something a little more than a compact car sized rear space would be much appreciated.

robertsmx

Honda already offers something for such dads. It is called Accord. Since we're into measuring legroom, I decided to do some research to put a little perspective to this discussion. We just can't assume Saab and BMW are doing something about legroom, can we? So here it goes... a list compiled for a few cars with front and rear seat legroom added together (to eliminate the differences in forward/rearward position of front seat)... best to worst,
Nissan Altima: 80.4"
Honda Accord: 79.4"
Toyota Camry: 79.4"
Mazda6: 78.8"
Honda Civic: 78.2"
Saab 9-3: 77.4"
VW Passat: 76.8"
BMW 325i: 76.0"
Audi A4: 75.6"

Now, if TSX offered as much space (cabin length) as Honda Civic, it would be middle-pack and handily beat the Saab, VW, BMW and Audi in that regard.

varmint

You don't think the 260 hp TL-S is going to satisfy a heavy foot?!?!

ickes_mobile

more pics of JDM/European Accords...

www.clubtsx.com

civicw

Doesn't say much, I guess they're saving the details for the Detroit Show:

http://hondanews.com, see under latest news.

mariner7

How will they price the base TSX? It should be below the Accord V6, since its much less powerful and smaller. But having another Acura below the AcV6 doesnt make sense either! This Honda/Acura division is a mess, theres no real distinction between the 2.

diploid

It's been like that for a while now.

The Prelude was always more expensive than an Acura Integra. The Accord V-6 costs as much (or even more) as the Integra/RSX. The Honda S2000 costs more than an Acura CL. Even the Pilot can cost more than the RSX, TL, CL.

robertsmx

It doesn't matter to American Honda as a company as long as their sales/profits grow, and to buyers as long as they get what they want for their money's worth.

I would think TSX will be priced between Accord EX and EXV6 pricing, that would mean, $25K. It could be priced as much as EXV6, or may be a little more, but that should also mean some interesting features and/or serious chassis tuning for performance.

I find it a great idea to have 'another Acura' under Accord V6, because the other Acura is small and has only two doors. It is a sensible model for Acura to have a small sedan to appeal to young buyers and at the same time be within their affordability. IMO, it is better for Honda to launch good products at a reasonable price than overpriced boats for the old people. They have too many choices anyway.

diploid

I don't think it would start that high. I am guessing the TSX will start at around 22K. That makes it a little more expensive than an RSX-S and well below the TL.

sunilb

I'm wondering if Acura is going to be concerned about the pricing of the TSX, given that it's natural competition (the Mazda6) is priced from ~ $18K (4cyl.) to $24K (6 cyl.).

I would imagine that this might play a significant role. From what I can tell, these are going to be cross-shopped heavily: aside from looking very similar, they are both sporty, mid-size sedans with a European flavor. Both will come with a manual, and relatively luxurious appointments.

I don't see this (TSX) competing with BMW or Audi customers.

I can't wait until the comparison drives come out. So far, most journalists really like the Mazda6 for it's better (as compared to current U.S. offerings) handling.

Does anyone else think the TSX looks like a slammed (96-00) Civic? Personally, I initially liked the looks of the TSX but now it's starting to look a little less mature to me. And while part of me likes the looks, I still don't want to have to worry about parts of my car getting ripped off by youth who want to modify their cars.
.

diploid

According to the Euro write ups, the TSX's handling is quite good. It uses the same interior materials as the US Accord (read: very good materials). So based on those, it should equal or better the Mazda6.

What it basically boils down to is the price and the looks, which is where the Mazda6 might have its advantages.

ickes_mobile

Japanese Accord...

http://www.honda.co.jp/ACCORD/view/exterior/

himiler

This month's Sport Compact Car reports that the TSX may also offer a version of the Accord's 3.0 V6 in addition to the 2.4 I4.

Given the good ink the Mazda 6s is getting, I'm inclined to think Acura will have to answer the call with a V6 option. Too bad we won't get the JDM Accord wagon or AWD option.

mariner7

If the TSX is a big success, and my bet's on it, how would Lexus and Infiniti respond? Bring in the IS200 and G25, which BTW are already available in Japan?

himiler

As much as I'd like to see it, I doubt if Lexus will go any more "downmarket" than the IS300. As MB (and soon to be BMW) is learning, you can't really call yourself a luxury brand if you sell a car priced in the $20K range.

The IS200 would work better as a Toyota (as it is in the JDM, where Lexus is just a funny word), but it might steal sales from the Corolla/Matrix. Also, given the trouble Toyota has had with 6-spd. trannys and high-winding motors in the Celica GT-S, it's unlikely to appear anytime soon, if ever.

Maybe Toyota will offer something like the IS200 as a top model in their upcoming Scion brand. As a BMW 1-Series fighter, it would fit in just fine.

Besides, Lexus sees itself competeing in a different market than Acura, which is mostly correct.

As for Infiniti, they're going to be busy just keeping up with demand for the G35 sedan and coupe.

robertsmx

I would love to see the 240 HP 3.0/V6 in the Type-S model , and base version could get 200 HP 2.4/I-4. With that combination, this car would be no-brainer for those who care.

diploid,
$22K sounds too low compared to Integra GS-R sedan (~$23K). Acura could offer it for less, but at the expense of standard features. I doubt there will be a stripped model for a low startng price tag. American Accord (LX/LXV6) already cover the $20-23K price range. TSX will likely come in one or two model trims, and as is Acura's practice, NAV being the only option on one or both.
Honda/Acura isn't going to care about volume sales of this car. It may be limited to 30-40K units per year. May be 60K at best, something they can easily meet with fully loaded versions (and it makes sense for a car under premium brand name to come with 'luxury' features.

varmint

Dunno about that. IIRC, it requires a different transmission than the 2.4L engine. If they do offer the V6, it will probably be with an auto gear box or manumatic only. I doubt Acura will offer many choices in a relatively low-volume car.

Perhaps Robert is correct, and the I4 will be a manumatic with the Type S model being the V6 6-speed.

newcar31

Acura offers a manual tranny for the TL Type-S, I don't see why they wouldn't with a V6 TSX (If there is going to be a V6 TSX). The tranny is already in their parts bin.

diploid

Probably for weight distribution as well as engine bay space.

mariner7

Honda likes to make lightweight Type S & R. I-4 TSX-S, making >220hp, would drive rings around the competition, and might even take on the WRX & Lancer Evo! V6 might be too heavy in performance TSX. Does a V6 Maz6 outperform a I4 6?

1wiseguy

Here's a link to the Canadiandriver.com confirmation that the TSX will come to North America...and a sketch as well. Looks nicer than some of the photos I've seen.

http://www.canadiandriver.com/news/021217-1.htm

ickes_mobile

in either base or Type-S form. They do have a manual transmission available for the CL Type-S and for the new Accord coupe in V-6 form (with very limited supply).

1wiseguy

Is that new for '03? I thought that a 6 speed manual was available for '02.

I am currently looking to buy a 4 door sporty sedan and will not consider any car with an auto transmission.

I prefer driving my wife's Civic compared to my ML 320 for that reason alone.

If Acura does the same thing with the TSX and only sells the slushbox version, I guess that will make my decision easier- I'll buy the Mazda6. Of course neither car is available in Canada yet so I'll just have to wait.

ickes_mobile

for the TL. The CL Type-S has the 6-speed manual...

varmint

That's true. The 6 speed from the Accord Coupe might fit along with the V6, but Acura is not going to offer this vehicle without an automatic gearbox. Offering two engine choices, and two transmissions would be fairly abnormal for a low volume car. The best selling CR-V only gets one engine and the manual gearbox is limited to certain models. The MDX, Pilot, and Ody are automatic only. The Civic and Accord are the highest volume cars, so there's some profit to made with multiple offerings. Aside from that, the CL-S is the only exception, and, frankly, Acura may be wishing they hadn't bothered.

I'm not saying it's impossible. It's just un-likely.

That Candaian Driver article is dated today and mentions only an i-VTEC engine. The Accord's V6 isn't i-VTEC, it's the older three-rocker system without the "i". I'm thinking this V6 speculation is probably way too premature.

diploid

You never knew with Honda, though. Who expected them to go into a horsepower war with Nissan with the new Accord?

If you looked at the redesigned Civic and CR-V, you wouldn't think they'd engage in the HP wars. But then you have the Odyssey and re-energized MDX to disprove that. They're somewhat inconsistent and I honestly don't see any clear trend that they follow. It's more of a whim on Honda's part to whether go with the flow or not.

robertsmx

IMO, TSX gets one trim, one option (NAV). As indicated, it will come with 17" rims, so that rules out 24T/TL version of Japanese Accord (which comes with 16" rims), and brings in the 24S version (which comes standard with 17" rims).

Another indication is that it will come with a choice of 5-speed SportShift Auto or 6-speed manual transmission (Honda doesn't offer 6-speed manual transmission in JDM Accord with 2.4 liter engine).

I'm still going with 2.4 liter I-4 with 200 HP/172 lb.-ft, with MSRP of about $25K-$27K with more features than Accord EX/EXV6. Sounds good enough to me.

BTW, TL-S was never available with 6-speed manual. Only CL-S was offered with the choice (which also added helical LSD but eliminated VSA).

varmint

Well, they do have a 6 speed mated to the 2.0L in the RSX-S. That is essentally the same block as the bored and stroked 2.4L engine. So I can see an auto and manual version of the 2.4 TSX. That's only two variants. But adding the V6 means more trannies and more variants.

robertsmx

The same 6-speed (RSX-S) is also used in the new ITR (with shorter axle ratio), and now in Accord Euro-R as well.

heisnstein

Unless Honda has changed the Euro Accord's interior configuration for the TSX, I don't think the TSX will fall “in the middle of the pack” on interior space. Simply adding front and rear dimensions is not to the point, since any competing model you can think of (except for the Altima) has front legroom virtually within a half of an inch of 42 inches, up or down, meaning that most variances in interior legroom show up in fact on the rear side. Now, I don’t think Honda will all of a sudden do front legroom any differently. So, assuming the data I’ve received from Honda on the Euro Accord’s rear space is accurate, TSX’s rear legroom could be tight. Of course, Honda may have decided to give the TSX an interior legroom to at least match the Civic Sedan, but I’ve seen nothing out there to suggest that this is the case.

Separately, you think those who want rear space from Honda should look at other models. That’s in fact probably what a lot of people would do had Honda not botched the design of the Accord. But things are the way they are and, while no one expects Accord/TL room from the TSX, I have a strong feeling that many potential purchasers out there are hoping that Honda has configured the TSX to provide more interior space than what is available from the bottom of the pack.

Of course, what will count most of all are not the numbers anyway but the way the car feels in person, both in space and performance. Hopefully, we won’t have to wait long to find out.

diploid

Spring we will find out. I hope they let us sit in the cars at the auto shows.

bigdaddycoats

Does anybody know what the interior dimensions are for this car? I tried to find out the specs on the european accord but had no luck. If anybody knows let me know - also I imagine that a sunroof will be standard since all other Acura's have them.

heisnstein

Comparisons of interior dimensions between the American Honda and the European Honda can be misleading, for two reasons. First, I understand that at least leg room is measured differently. Secondly, while I don't think Honda will actually lengthen the exterior dimensions of the European Accord for its debut here as the TSX, it is possible that it may reconfigure interior space somewhat.

With these caveats in mind, I believe the following information, obtained from Honda, approximates certain interior dimensions on the European Accord.

The rear hip room on the European Accord appears to be 54.4 inches, which is pretty decent, with the front hip room the same. This measurement seems to be reliable since it measures the length between two fixed points.

Rear legroom on the European Accord, however, appears to be 33.9 inches, which I find pretty disappointing, given what competitors seem to be coming up with. This measurement is less reliable because Europeans measure leg room differently than do Americans, although I believe this measurement does a reasonable job of taking those differences into account. Because of those differences, I have been unable to get a sense of what front legroom is, although pretty much all its potential competitors uniformly provide around 42 inches of front leg room and I see no reason why Honda will do more (or less).

I don't have any information yet on headroom, but may be able to get something on that a little later.

Hope this helps.

robertsmx

if you notice, the rear leg room area is just about front and center in the photo. This suggests that Honda designed the shot in part to show a comfortable rear space and may have moved the front seats up to do so.
And that is just the reason I added front and rear legroom of some cars in the class. Now, if 42" front legroom is desired to start with (and front seat 'adjusted' accordingly), the following provides a good baseline for comparison.
Audi A4: 33.6"
BMW 325: 34"
VW Passat: 34.8"

These might be comparable to TSX, if not better. And TSX might very well be mid-pack given these numbers. Said that, if leg room is a huge issue with a typical TSX buyer, they have Accord or TL to look at. I'm glad to see that TSX is not another jumbo-sized sedan, just right for them who thought American Accord had grown too big.

I don't think the Euro Accord is narrower than the NA Accord. According to Edmunds, the NA Accord's rear hip room is 53.5 inches.
Euro/JDM Accord is about 1.5" narrower than American Accord. However, not all of it should get reflected on the inside. As you mentioned that Euro Accord offers hip-room of 54.4" (front and rear), that sounds impressive compared to American Accord's 54.6"/53.5" (Front/Rear) and Altima's 53.0"/52.7" (Front/Rear).

raychuang00

I have this feeling that Honda may spring a surprise on us in regards to the Acura TSX.

Consider this possibility: a CVT automatic transmission with manual shifting for up to seven forward ratios, similar to what Honda has done with the CVT on the JDM/European market Fit/Jazz five-door hatchback. JATCO, a Japanese automotive transmission supplier, has begun supplying belt-type CVT's to Nissan for the Murano small SUV; what's to say that JATCO may have made a CVT that works with the Accord/TSX platform?

I think a CVT-equipped Acura TSX could sell quite well, especially since the result could be a quite fast-accelerating car with extremely smooth acceleration and good fuel efficiency.

robertsmx

I doubt. I would prefer clutchless manual or a conventional manual over tricked out CVT. However, the surprise could be in terms of the engine. If J30A is getting 270 HP/234 lb.-ft in some markets, J25A could get... 220 HP/190 lb.-ft! If that engine makes it into TSX, with 6-speed, this car would be even more interesting.

radocha

How about just one displacement for both trims? 2.4L at 160/210HP...typical, proven, and capable.
If Nissan made its 3.5 pretty much ubiquitous, why not Honda?

raychuang00

I think a "tricked out" CVT would be better-suited for the US market since the majority of Americans are used to driving automatic transmissions. The fact that the Nissan Murano has a CVT (not a mean feat with a 240 bhp V6!) means the engineering to build a CVT for the Acura TSX should be very straightforward and easy.

robertsmx

As easy as buying CVT from the same source that Nissan did (JATCO?).

TSX is likely to get K24A with 200 HP as the only engine choice, may be 190 HP is Acura sticks with Euro-specs. 5 speed auto/Sport Shift or 6-speed manual. That would be good enough.