Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





2007 Acura TL Type S

18911131420

Comments

  • frisconickfrisconick Posts: 1,275
    Does anyone know how long those high performance tires last?
  • habitat1habitat1 Posts: 4,282
    I got 19,000 miles out of my TL 6-speed "HPT" tires - Bridgestone Potenzas (not tourenzas). They were rotated at least 3 times. I could have pushed them a little further, but their wet traction was horrible.

    By comparison, I traded a 2002 Honda S2000 with "W" rated tires in at 19,000 miles and they had at least 3-5k left on the rears, 5-10k on the fronts. And my current 911S, with 295/19/30 series rear tires looks better at 12.8k miles than the TL's did.

    I sincerely believe that (very) high performance tires for a FWD Acura TL are a waste of money. The suspension isn't that high performance and the 60/40 weight imbalance certainly isn't. A good set of V or even H rated tires would be more than 95% of what anyone could get out of the car, if they are insane enough to take one to a track. It's a great "sporty" sedan, but it's not a sports car. It's certainly a lot closer to my former Nissan Maxima SE that could eek 50-55k miles out of "V" rated Goodyear Eagles .
  • frisconickfrisconick Posts: 1,275
    Thanks hab. I agree it's not a sports car, it's a sporty, fairly big sedan. The TL does't look big, but is slightly bigger than a Camry. :surprise:
  • bodble2bodble2 Posts: 4,519
    "...but is slightly bigger than a Camry."

    Is it? :surprise: I didn't think it was.
  • frisconickfrisconick Posts: 1,275
    I didn't either untill I looked up the specs, and it's much heavier than Camry too. :surprise:
  • bodble2bodble2 Posts: 4,519
    to see the TL-S up close and in person. Most impressive styling feature --- the quad chrome exhaust tips. :shades: Weekest styling feature -- the tires/wheels. Don't care for the design, which also somehow makes the tire/wheel look even more undersized. :sick:
  • You will get use to them. Clean the car, put a good dressing on the tires and they look nice. I have silver TL-S and it looks good. I had a 06 TL and loved those wheels. I am use to my new 07 wheels. Some people actually come up to me and say how they love the 07 TL-S wheels. So its all a matter of opinion.

    And anybody bashing the 07 TL-S, go buy the other one and shut up. The 07 TL Type-S is AWESOME in every way IMHO!!!!
  • pv2pv2 Posts: 37
    Got my TL-S in Carbon Bronze Pearl (still can't get used to saying it) but the smoky chrome wheels look good with that color and don't show brake dust as much as silver or chrome would.
    I agree the wheel design is just OK but some people love it and I don't dislike it enough to pay to replace it.
  • frisconickfrisconick Posts: 1,275
    the wheel design is just OK but some people love it and I don't dislike it enough to pay to replace it.

    I feel the same way. I was going to replace the wheels first thing, but after a week I changed my mind, they are not that bad.
  • Well, i can tell you the Type S handles the cold weather well enough! Drove a 6 hour round trip in -35C last week, it didn't miss a beat, averaged 23.6 mpg at 80 mph even in that cold weather, heated the front interior just fine, no frosty windows....When you're doing 75 mph and want to pass someone, you hit the gas and the next thing tou know you're doing 100 mph in no time at all....lovin it!!
    Some little gripes are....The MP3 hook up is awkward hidden down in the centre console, should be a plug in right to the radio on the front stack. Don't need the tape player, wasted space! Don't get a lot of heat into the back of the car through the back vents.
    Pluses...The power is amazing. The looks are great, the car draws comments wherever i go. The dash is beautiful, especially the night lighting!
  • bodble2bodble2 Posts: 4,519
    "...the next thing tou know you're doing 100 mph"

    No ice on the road, at -35C?! :confuse: BTW, was it at the north pole? :P
  • No. No ice on the road b/c it hadn't snowed for a few days and the road was clear. The road was the Trans Canada, I was travelling between Brandon and Manitoba which lately has felt like the North Pole!!
    -35C seems unbelievable, but trust me, it's real and it sucks, with the wind chill we have had a lot of temps down to -45C and -49C. Today it's up to -7C though! I was a little bit worried about making that first long trip in the cold, but the car was fine. Incidentally, during those -30C days, when idling for 10 minutes and making 5 minute drives in town, the car is averaging 13 mpg, my F150 is averaging about 8 mpg in the same situatuon. My 02 RSX averages 16 mpg in the same situation. Cold weather kills your mpg!!
  • habitat1habitat1 Posts: 4,282
    "Cold weather kills your mpg!!"

    It must, because even at 10-20 degrees farenheit, I get close to 30 mpg highway with my 2004 TL 6-speed at 75+/- mph. Back in December, at 30 degrees farenheit, I averaged 26.8 mpg in my 911S at an average of 77 mph over 360 miles.

    For you to only get 23 mpg, that cold dense air must be like pushing the car through jello. Although I would have thought the higher oxygen content (due to density) would have helped offset the temperature effect.
  • bodble2bodble2 Posts: 4,519
    His mpg was driving short trips around town, not @ 75+ mph on the highway. Your TL would have gotten similar mpg under his conditions.
  • I wish i could change my computer readout from metric to imperial, b/c I have no idea what 12L/100 km really means for fuel consumption until i get the calculator out! And the windshield washer system sucks, I can't get any fluid to the middle third (bottom half) of the windshield.
    Still loving the looks and the power though!!!
  • I didn't like the wheels until I saw them on a white TL-S. So I bought a white one with a six speed manual. I love the look and everything about the car including the 34 mpg highway and 27 mpg combined. That's what a manual driven the right way will do for you.
  • habitat1habitat1 Posts: 4,282
    "I love the look and everything about the car including the 34 mpg highway and 27 mpg combined."

    What car are you talking about? :confuse:

    The 3.5 liter TL-S is rated at 20 city, 29 highway, same as my lighter 3.2 liter 2004 TL 6-speed, which, of itself, is a little suspicious. From my 24,000 miles of experience, you won't see anywhere near 20 mpg in true city driving. I can hit 29-30 mpg on the highway with the cruise set at 70, but the best I do in "mixed" driving is 16-18 mpg. (Pure city is more like 13-14). My TL is barely better than my 911S (15-17 mixed / 26-27 highway). And 25%+ less than my former Nissan Maxima 5-speed in similar mixed driving (22-24). Even my former Honda S2000, rated at 20/26, would beat the heck out of the TL in fuel efficiency in both highway (30-33) and mixed (22-23). In 18,000 miles on the S2000, the worst "mixed" tankful I had was 19 mpg. In the TL, I've never hit that without a fair amount of highway cruising thrown in.

    The TL has many good attributes. But fuel efficiency is not one of them, at least as far as city/mixed driving goes.
  • pv2pv2 Posts: 37
    "I love the look and everything about the car including the 34 mpg highway and 27 mpg combined."

    What car are you talking about?

    The 3.5 liter TL-S is rated at 20 city, 29 highway, same as my lighter 3.2 liter 2004 TL 6-speed, which, of itself, is a little suspicious.

    My 2007 TL-S (auto with 2000 miles on it) gets 15-17 in city driving, 19 in mixed driving and 21-23 on the highway with one trip getting just under 26. Since the car is fairly new, I expect those numbers to improve a bit but still not get up to where my 2003 CL-S was at 19-21 city and 23-25 highway. A little disappointing, but we don't buy sport sedans for the gas mileage. ;)
  • habitat1habitat1 Posts: 4,282
    Your city & mixed isn't far from mine (a little better, actually), but I would hope your highway mileage improves substantially. I consistently average between 28 and 30 per on 360 mile (one-way) trips to our second home. I was getting that when I only had 1,000 miles on the odometer, so if your's doesn't improve you might want to have it checked out.

    I can live with the mileage of the TL, but I don't give Acura much slack by calling the TL a "sport sedan". I have a friend with a 530i 6-speed that has averaged 26 mpg (60% highway) over 30,000 miles since it was new in 2005. Another friend with a 330cic averages 32+ mpg on the highway and that car is both heavier and faster than the TL. I'm not sure why the TL is worse than average, as my Honda S2000 clobbered it's EPA ratings.
  • pv2pv2 Posts: 37
    Thanks for your comments. Clearly a FWD sedan with auto is stretching the sport sedan category a bit but it is included as an ELLPS. I had a couple of 328 coupes (1997 and 2000) and they did get mileage in the mid 20's though not much above 26-27 on the highway (both with auto). However, those cars were a few hundred pounds lighter (3300-3400?) than the TL-S is now (over 3600). I think a realistic mileage appraisal will have to await a longer trip. The longest highway trip I've done is 75 miles and that was with under 1000 miles on the odo. Most of my highway driving is under 25 miles so just getting to & from the highway has an impact. :cry:
  • xrunner2xrunner2 Posts: 3,062
    The suspension isn't that high performance and the 60/40 weight imbalance certainly isn't.

    Weight distribution is important of course, but suspension and tires are a huge factor. Doesn't the Porsche 911 have an odd weight distribution (something like 40/60?) with its engine hung out over rear axle? Recall that Porsche company spent a couple or more decades in taming the evil handling and unpredictability of its design with suspension and tires. Read numerous accounts years ago in car magazines about testers swapping ends and putting the 911 car off the road and into the weeds or nearly so.

    Acura TL for being a "sporty" entry lux sedan does ok in actual "measured" handling data vs pure sports cars like 911.

    Heard of all the talk about feel of 50/50 in cars like 3 series, and that cannot be denied, but neither can actual test data.

    It will be interesting to see Edmunds or R&T test data of an 07 TL type S equipped with best tires from Acura. How close can it come in handling with its inferior (60/40) weight dist to ideal (50/50) cars such as 3 series or unbalanced (40/60) dist Porsche?

    Don't know what is going on in SCCA autocross today, but would doubt that very few people if any are entering TLs. That is not the purpose nor character of the car.
  • pv2pv2 Posts: 37
    It will be interesting to see Edmunds or R&T test data of an 07 TL type S equipped with best tires from Acura. How close can it come in handling with its inferior (60/40) weight dist to ideal (50/50) cars such as 3 series or unbalanced (40/60) dist Porsche?

    The February issue of R&T tested an 07 TL-S with Bridgestone Potenza RE-03's which are the "summer performance" tire option. Regular TL-S's are equipped with Michelin all season tires of the same size (245x45).

    As for handling, the numbers in the R&T comparo (IS350 & G35) had the TL performing quite respecably by comparison to the rear drivers. Below are a few excerpts from the test (hope the formatting holds):

    TL-S G35S IS350
    Braking 60-0 117ft. 120ft. 126ft.
    Braking 80-0 214ft. 208ft. 219ft.
    Skidpad .91G .88G .84G
    Slalom 66.0mph 65.5mph 66.7mph

    All cars were indicated as having "mild understeer" on the skidpad and slalom.

    All in all a respectable performance by the TL-S. I will agree that on a racetrack or roadcourse the TL would likely be left behind; but not by too much. Apart from FWD the TL's other weakness is power and that showed in slower 0-60 and 1/4 mile times vs. the other cars (5.7 & 14.3@99.9 vs. mid-high 13's for the others).
  • habitat1habitat1 Posts: 4,282
    Owning both a 2004 TL 6-speed and 2005 911S, I can assure you there is just a bit of a difference in the dynamic balance of these two cars.

    Under medium-hard acceleration, the front end (drive wheels) of the TL lightens up - just the opposite of what you want and what happens in a RWD car. That results in wheel spin and hop, to add to the fun of torque steer.

    Under braking, the opposite occurs and the weight is shifting to an even greater front end bias, causing the front end to try to dive down. That causes the plowing feeling in turns.

    The 355 hp 911S records faster acceleration times than the similar weight 400 hp Corvette and matches the 500 hp Viper due, in large part, to the efficiency with which it's rear engine, RWD setup puts the power to the pavement. It was true, in the old days, that the handling (at the limits) of the 911 took some getting used to. That has been pretty well covered by suspension advancements, 295 series rear rubber and sophisticated stability management systems. Not quite to the point of making it as easy to drive as a mid-engine Cayman, but its limits are a lot higher than my abilities. Not true of the TL, by a long shot.

    For the record, I do think the Acura engineers have done a respectable job of getting the most our of a FWD platform for a rather heavy sedan (my old 1995 Maxima SE was 500 lbs lighter). But if you want a real feel for the handling difference, don't just read reviews, take your own enthusiastic test drives of a TL vs. a 335i. The TL works really well as a sporty family sedan in our 3 car household. But a true sport sedan it isn't, at least by my definition.
  • hausshauss Posts: 169
    frisconick, did you get a new TL-S? What color combo and did you go with the manual or auto?
  • tgr3tgr3 Posts: 13
    I just got my Type S, have only 500 miles on it. I do not know if anybody has experienced this, but I can clearly hear loud thumping noise when the rear tires hit a decent size bump in the road, it is driving me crazy. It is noticeable enough that my friends question me about it. I know it is a stiff sport suspension, and I am wondering if this is normal for the car, or shall I take it back to the dealer ?? :mad:
  • chaperoahchaperoah Posts: 30
    I hear the same noises. Almost like a little bit of a rattle. Could that just be something in the trunk? Curious...
  • tgr3tgr3 Posts: 13
    I tore the trunk apart, fastened everything down. It is a loud deep thumping noise when it hits a good size road bump. I called my dealer a few min. ago and he said to bring it in. I will post what he tells me, but it is very enoying. you pay so much for a luxury car, you don't expect it to be back at the dealer's after 1 week !!! it's either normal for this type of suspension, or there is something wrong. will post what dealer says tonite.
  • pv2pv2 Posts: 37
    Have my TL-S for just over 2 months and have noticed a "thump" over certain bumps, but have attributed to the suspension reacting to the bump rather than anything in the trunk, etc. Will be curious to hear what your dealer says.
  • tgr3tgr3 Posts: 13
    well, you guys won't believe this. but BOTH struts in the rear are "shot" according to the dealer, this is where the thumping is coming from on hard bumps. I am so mad I cannot see straight. A $35,000 car with 500 miles on it, and the rear struts are already shot. They have to order them from the factory (1-2 weeks), and then I have to take it back to get them replaced. Should have bought the Lexus IS350. stay tuned. This is the second trip to the dealer. I am seriously starting to research lemon laws
Sign In or Register to comment.