Acura TL 2009

pat

Actually Kirstie is your host, I just visiting because I like reading about the future TL!

I don't know the answer to your question, but it might be interesting to pose it in the Luxury Lounge. Of course "ideal" is subjective, so ideal for you will depend on your priorities.

Luxury Performance Sedans and/or Entry Level Luxury Performance Sedans may interest you as well. The latter is the category where the present-day TL is discussed.

robertsmx

diesel will seem more powerful, provide better gas mileage, and I have never heard of reduced refinement in a clean diesel. Where are you coming from with that line of logic?

Good or impressive "for a diesel" doesn't mean it is just as good as gasoline. There must be a good reason for gasoline cars to still exist in Europe. If I were buying a diesel today, it would be purely for fuel economy purpose, not looking for power (or feel of) or refinement.

A downside to diesel is narrow power band. Sure, the power curve is flat (fairly close to peak power for most part due to impressive but quickly falling torque curve), here is something that I picked up from E320 CDI review:

"With its narrow power band, the seamless seven-speed transmission shifts often and the torque is not there forever, but it's pretty remarkable when it is."

Another downside to diesel, often missed, is the additional weight they bring, around 200 lb. One of the worst offenders in that regard is Honda's Civic diesel/EX, which weighs a whopping 360 lb (163 kg) more than Civic 1.8/EX.

jwaggoner

Well done.

Does the Honda diesel available in Europe have a narrow torque band?

robertsmx

Yes, like every other diesel. Here are the specs:
2.2-liter, 138 HP @ 4000 rpm, 251 lb-ft @ 2000 rpm. I believe the redline is 4500 rpm.

The diesel advantage is that the engine is making 70% of its peak at just 2000 rpm. That accounts for better performance compared to similarly powered (or slightly more powerful) gasoline engines. So, a 140 HP gasoline won't perform as well as 140 HP diesel since the average power is higher in the latter.

However, we start comparing peak torque numbers, and often find, as in the case above, the diesel produces nearly as much peak as many V6 gasoline engines and at a much lower rpm. The problem is that being a turbo, diesel engines show an abrupt jump in torque curve around 1500 rpm, and fall like a rock off a cliff around 3000 rpm. While V6 gasoline engine will have a much broader torque curve, even if its peak were slightly lower. The result is higher peak power.

And since most V6 engine would rev to 6500 rpm or higher, they can be geared 40% shorter. And that helps address the torque issue.

Diesel, as it is now, would make more sense in people/load haulers though. By that measure, MDX will be a better candidate for it than TL.

autofashion

Hey guys, i was driving from Irvine to San Diego today on the 5 when i spot two cars in full camo. I as i pass them, i snap a couple of shot from my camera phone. The front grill had an acura symbol under the camo, and it looked like the grill on the new MDX.

Please excuse the horrible pictures, hopefully you will be able to at least get an idea

[IMG]http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l258/Listn2marley44/newtl2.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l258/Listn2marley44/newtl.jpg[/IMG]

robertsmx

Good job. Looks like it is the next TL (based on other spy shots).

scottm123

The fact that you saw this and had time to take 2 shots... I commend you!

I know it's super hard to go by a few pics, but from the first shot, the front end (to me) screams "Pontiac" and that's not a good thing.

In the second shot, it looks smaller than the current TL but carries most of the same body lines.

From the spy pics of the Honda Accord, I thought I'd hate the new look.
Seeing them on the commercials now... I was wrong.

I cannot have an opinion on this new TL design until I actually see one.

autofashion

upstatedoc

I'm having a hard time viewing those pics, a little help?

robertsmx

upstatedoc, try it now...
Pic 1
Pic 2

There are more spy shots available elsewhere (you could go to C&D, or TOV, probably here in Edmunds too).

upstatedoc

I don't know, to me that doesn't look like the vehicle on the TOV website. Isn't it smaller?

robertsmx

It does look a bit different and smaller to me (especially in the second picture). This could be the next TSX. The other spy pictures point to next TL however.

I was actually surprised to see TL spy pictures surfacing before we got a peek at next TSX.

scottm123

Very good point and I don't know why I didn't think of that earlier.

It definitely looks smaller and very well could be the next TSX.

I'm not seeing the new rear lights as posted in previous TL spyshots, and it just doesn't look as aggressive.

bf109ace

I agree. So far Honda/Acura hasn't come with a V8 engine yet on their non-racing cars. Lexus now has a 5.0L V8 on its IS-F. BWM has V8, V10 and V12s.

What's the problem? Honda/Acura needs to produce a powerful engine with low-end torque. VTEC is good only when you rev the engine.

bf109ace

the current TL already has a long '[non-permissible content removed]'- 191 inches. Acura should make it shorter and more agile like the BMW and Audi.

It's not easy to haul a very long and big car.

kennyg8

Longer [non-permissible content removed] means bigger trunk. Unless you don't need trunk space, which is not that big in the current TL to begin with, you do need some [non-permissible content removed]. Imagine a TL w/o any [non-permissible content removed]

robertsmx

TL is a bigger car than BMW 3-series/Audi A4, and it needs to be. For smaller car, there is the TSX. And at 189" long, TL isn't really long either.

VTEC is good only when you rev the engine.
Wrong. VTEC, even in its most basic form, allows two cam profiles. One for low-mid range, and another for mid-high range. So in fact, VTEC gets you more at low and more at high, and more in between.

It is a different matter that this set up allowed Honda to offer some high revving designs (without compromised low-end). And the V6 in Acuras aren't really "high revving". They do rev smoothly all the way to redline, and always willing to rev up. They ain't diesel engines, after all. :P

hpmctorque

Since you and I agree on many things, such as a desire to see the TL convert to RWD architecture, I hope you don't mind my asking you a couple of questions. First, what cars, if any, were your second and third choices when you purchased your TL? Second, assuming you were in the market for an '09 replacement for your TL, and assuming the '09 TL is available with a choice of FWD and AWD, or AWD only, would you consider a competing RWD alternative? My second question further assumes that you'll like the styling and features of the '09 TL, but that it again shares its platform with the Accord.

jwaggoner

I will be looking hard at the 135I which will handle better than the TL and will be faster at all speeds as well so buck Acura with there wanna be upscale bullsheet. Let the leader lead and the big dog eat!

robertsmx

I don’t have any problem with TL being FWD. Since my budget was $36K, I wouldn’t have gone for AWD either. My first choice was TSX, followed by TL with BMW 328i being a remote possibility. But I got a great deal on TL while dealers weren’t budging much off TSX, so TL was it.

With lack of RWD, Acura is simply losing out on prestige factor. They are hoping to make up for it using SH-AWD, but then it sounds more like a patch up job since it brings with it’s a set of undesirable compromises (cost, weight and efficiency). If those were non-factors, then I couldn’t complain. But then, I don’t see the need for RWD or FWD bias for myself.

hpmctorque

So, would you buy a '09 TL if it comes with SH-AWD standard, as the RL does, or would you be more likely to buy an Accord or TSX, or a BMW 3-Series? Of course, SH-AWD could also be standard on the next generation TSX, In that case, unless Honda miraculously discovers a way to circumvent the laws of physics, in terms of cost, weight, and efficiency, I'd probably choose something else.

robertsmx

If SH-AWD were standard, and within my budget, I would get it. My budget for last purchase was $35K, and that won't happen if SH-AWD were indeed standard. I would say, about $40K.

So, that will take me to next choice, which would be TSX. Perhaps with SH-AWD, that could be had for $35K. We will just have to see. Accord is a great alternative too.

As much as I would keep BMW on the list, it remains lower on the list for couple of reasons. One, they are very good value as lease vehicles (cheaper than Acuras), but I drive way too much for leasing to be a sensible option. Secondly, I drive too much.

hpmctorque

AWD is typically priced ~$2,000, as an option, so I'm guessing it might add ~$1,500 to the price of a car if it's standard. While no one likes to pay for something that he doesn't want in the first place, an additional $1,500 represents 3.75% of $40,000, or, to look at it another way, it's 3.9% of $38,500 (the MSRP of a $40,000 AWD TL without the AWD). I'm not suggesting that this amount is insignificant, but it wouldn't be a deal breaker, either. If anything, the incremental cost, plus the drawbacks of AWD, could be deal breakers. But maybe not. I'll reserve judgment until the '09 TSX and TL are introduced.

When comparing a '09 AWD TL or TSX to a '09 RWD 3-Series, I guess the question, for those who feel that the pros and cons of AWD at zero cost are a wash, is whether the TL or TSX is a better value than the BMW by at least 4%. I'm on the fence, but would probably choose the BMW if Acura makes AWD standard. I might choose the BMW next time even if AWD drive is optional, because I think RWD is preferable to FWD for cars with turbo fours or 300 hp V6s. The horsepower and torque increases have gotten to the point where the tradeoffs favor RWD for sport sedans and coupes. For this reason, in addition to fuel economy and better weight distribution, if I were to buy an '08 Accord, I'd choose the 4 cylinder engine. However, my views on which car would be best for me could change when I see and evaluate the '09 Acura sedans.

The 3-Series is somewhat pricey, and, arguably, not as good a value as the TL and TSX, but its attributes compensate for the price premium.

scottm123

A lot of people seem to be under the impression that the TL will come with an option for AWD.
ie. get it with FWD -or- SH-AWD

Don't hold your breathe.

Acura has plans for the entire lineup to be SH-AWD.
I wouldn't plan on a non-AWD model being available.

Of course, only time will tell, but I think it's gonna be all SH-AWD once they're done will all the changes.

The rumor mill said that the TSX would be the next model to be SH-AWD... but the 08 is still FWD...so who knows when all this will finally take place. :confuse:

hpmctorque

My position is that I don't know, nor am I guessing, whether Acura will follow the Audi model, which encourages purchase of the Quattro AWD option, but has FWD available to those who prefer it, or the Subaru model, with AWD standard. I think either approach is possible, but you could be right, scottm123. I see no evidence that Honda is preparing to go the Nissan/Infiniti route, where Nissans (except for the Z) are FWD and Infinitis are RWD.

I also agree with robertsmx's argument that Honda's FWD based SH-AWD system is not the best system for competing with BMW, Mercedes, Lexus, Infiniti, and Cadillac. Audi, Volvo, and Saab are examples of brands that compete in the luxury market with FWD architectures, but they are not the front runners in the luxury category above near-luxury. I'm talking here about the segments above the Audi A4, Acura TL, Volvo S70, Saab 9-3, Lincoln MKZ, Buick Lucerne, etc. FWD and FWD based AWD is capable of competing in the near-luxury market, and lower, although that could change if horsepower and torque continue to rise. Buyers who shell out big bucks, (>$40,000, more or less) seem to prefer RWD and RWD based AWD. That would explain why the Acura RL, Audi A6 and A8 (especially the latter), and Volvo S-80 have not been big successes, why Subaru has not penetrated the upscale market, and why Cadillac has opted to convert to RWD. Ask yourself, would the current generation Chrysler 300, a near luxury car, been as successful as it's been if that same car, in terms of outward appearance and dimensions, had been FWD? I don't think so.

It's possible that, with clever marketing, future Acuras will compete successfully with the BMW 5 and 7, Mercedes E and S Class, Lexus (above the ES), Infiniti, and Cadillac, but SH-AWD, whether standard or optional, is a head wind.
It will be interesting to watch this play out, but as one who likes Honda products a lot, I'd like to see Honda/Acura follow the Nissan/Infiniti model. This model would call for all Hondas to remain FWD (except the 2 seat sports car), and all Acuras would be RWD. FWD or RWD based SH-AWD would be an option, where needed.

robertsmx

SH-AWD may be more expensive than other AWD systems around (including Honda's lesser version of it, the VTM-4). And in an effort to trim down weight, additional pieces are generally incorporated which also add to the cost, but don't necessarily bring down the weight drastically. RL would be a good example.

Acura may have made SH-AWD cheaper in RDX (and MDX) compared to RL (a switch to conventional drive shaft instead of magnesium is one example) but it also has reduced features compared to RL.

But more than anything, I don't like the idea of adding 220-250 lb to the curb weight. I'm afraid, new TL with SH-AWD will tip the scale around 4000 lb (same as RL). And while that happens to be the curb weight of new CTS without AWD, it is detrimental to accelerative performance and fuel economy.

Keeping it simple would be the best idea, and that is to go RWD eventually on TL/RL platform. A niche model could exist with SH-AWD for those who want AWD traction and somewhat added handling advantage on dry conditions too.

billyperks1

Can someone find more spyshots and post them here? PLEEEEASE
I would rather see that than FWD AWD RWD SH-AWD.

hpmctorque

While the '08 CTS does seem a little porky, some if the weight differential compared with the '08 TL can be attributed to the fact that the CTS is a little larger than the TL (2.3" longer, .3" wider, 1.3" taller, and the trunk is 1.1 cubic ft. larger). That said, your comment concerning weight may have factored in the probability that the '09 TL will be larger than the '08 TL, and may, in fact, be similar or even slightly larger than the '08 CTS.

Would you like to see Honda offer a 4.0-4.5L V8 option for the TL or RL, or do you consider this unnecessary?

hpmctorque

There's a spy shot of the next generation ('09?) TSX on the Temple of VTEC site, but I haven't seen one of the '09 TL yet. I'm sure one will appear on Edmunds just as soon as its available.

robertsmx

CTS is still smaller than RL, and doesn't have AWD but weighs as much. I blame the weight more on platform as opposed to exterior dimensions (larger cars can be lighter) because sometimes extra length could be simply due to larger bumper or something as minor as a chin spoiler.

As for V8, it is not a necessity beyond marketing. If it were, competing cars like Infiniti M, BMW 5-series, Lexus GS and Mercedes E-class would sell with V8 power in greater numbers. In reality, 85-90% of sales for those cars have six cylinder power.

With RL, Acura messed up the gearing more than anything else. A proper 6AT would have gone a long way alleviate the cry for V8.

hpmctorque

"...85-90% of sales for those cars have six cylinder power." Good point!

"A proper 6AT would have gone a long way alleviate the cry for V8." Since the desire for a V8 is primarily a marketing issue, I don't think an extra cog in the tranny, even allowing for the fact that it would improve performance, would materially reduce the demand for a V8. Also, I think there is more interfering with the RL's success than the transmission. For example, the styling is unexciting, and its interior dimensions are too similar to the TL's.

It'll be interesting to see if the next generation Acuras feature six speed automatics. Aside from the performance enhancement, from a marketing standpoint this could differentiate Acuras from Hondas for 2-3 years.

jwaggoner

People, Acura will ofer AWD on all their vehicles. It is standard on the RL MDX and RDX AND it will be standard on the TL and TSX ok. Cant you think of anything else to discuss?

scottm123

Careful how you word that.

Acura is not going to "offer" AWD on all of their vehicles... Acura is making all of their vehicles on the SH-AWD platform.

The statement makes it sound like an option, which is is not going to be.
You will also NOT see RWD on the TL.. just not gonna happen.

I stay in contact with the guys at my Acura dealership and when in there for oil changes and stuff, we always chit chat about these things.
They have been to the Acura conventions and have more dirt than we could ever make up.

Acura is going to have SH-AWD vehicles across the boards, and are making necessary steps to bring all cars in the lineup higher in the luxury field.

Still, it's fun to talk rumors and see what others are also hearing.
This is the 2009 TL thread... and since it doesn't exist to us yet, that's what this thread will remain... a rumor mill.

robertsmx

I can’t see Acura making SH-AWD standard across the board. It should stay that way in RDX and MDX, and RL (if they refuse to go RWD). On TSX and TL, it will likely be the top of the line model, more along the lines of a Type-S. So, when we do see next TSX and TL, they both are likely to have lower powered base trims with FWD and high powered trims with SH-AWD. Essentially, adding SH-AWD trims to top off the model lineup that Acura doesn’t do on TSX and TL.

I will take my word over a sales/service person’s. :shades:

sebastian1

I am deciding between a AWD Infiniti G35 and Acura TL. I live in the northeast. I would be curious to know how the Acura TL front wheel drive performs in the snow. thanks

laurasdada

My (non-S) '05 TL was rather poor in the snow due to, I hope, the Bridgestone Turanze EL42 tires. I made it through the last two Boston winters without incident, just a lot more TCS and ABS (as well as caution) action than I've ever had in the snow before. Turanzas are gone, we'll see how the Toyos handle the white gold.

I've driven FWD all my life to the mountains of New England. Never really had a problem with FWD/all season tires....until the TL.

Can't speak to TLs with other tires, but given equal treads, AWD will give you better traction through the snow. The question is, do you want to (or care about) carrying the added weight and complexity of AWD all year long?

upstatedoc

My buddy had a G35x that went through anything. My'05 TL on the other hand did not. Even w/ 4 blizzaks, I got stuck on my hill which is why I went back to the MDX.

150mphclub

CTS does in fact offer AWD. While the AWD platform does exceed the weight of the RL, the RWD version with direct injection and AT weighs in at 3874.

hals120

Get rid of those crap Bridgestone Turanzas NOW. I replaced mine with Michelin Pilots, and the difference is simply amazing.

laurasdada

Hello: Replaced the Turanzas about 3000 miles ago with Toyo Versados. Noticeable improvement in ride and noise. So far seem fine in the wet, might get a chance for snow test this weekend? Probably not, it may snow but probably won't stick...

nctl

Hello: Replaced the Turanzas about 3000 miles ago with Toyo Versados. Noticeable improvement in ride and noise. So far seem fine in the wet, might get a chance for snow test this weekend? Probably not, it may snow but probably won't stick...

Are you still liking the Versado's? I have an 04 Tl, auto with BS LSZ's which I got free from BS after having the original EL42's. They seem only to wear a bit better, still flatspot and some noise. When I look to replace I thought about checking out the Versado's. One concern is if the W-rated would make it seem harsher than a lesser rated tire such as the ContiProContacts which get some good reviews on the TL for better comfort, smooth and quiet and less harsh over bumps and such and come in H and V rated versions..
Seems most every tire in this size because of small height of sidewall will flatspot to some extent. Looking to minimize it as much as I can, have you experienced any flatspotting when cold or have a set a few days without driving.
I'm looking for more ride comfort and quietness over handling, performance etc.
Any info would be appreciated.

laurasdada

Hi: I'll have to preface my response/thought with the fact that until the Bridgestone EL42s, I had never really thought about tires. Due to my snow-experience with them, I had to start thinking about tires, but I'm no expert.

Now, the Versados. Yes, I definitely find them to offer a smoother, quieter ride. Handling has been fine, but if I had to judge the Bridgestone's might have been a bit crisper at turn in. But the Toyo's turn and hold a line just fine for me. I'm not sure that it's been cold enough to note flat spotting, nor has my TL sat for more than a day without use. But, I have thought a couple of times that they were exhibiting that trait, I'm just not sure, sorry. I've only had the Versados for about 3k miles, but I think I'm already preferring them over the EL42s. Again, snow will be the true test for me.

sullyct

Buy the TL... Awesome car! I live in Lichfield CT & it is fine in the snow.

scottm123

Buy the G... Awesome car! I live in Charlton, MA & it is fine in the snow. :P

laurasdada

Buy the best car for you! And, if in doubt, buy snow tires! ~95% of the time you will not be driving in the snow...

I chose the TL in '05. Possibly the worst FWD I've owned in the snow due to, hopefully, the Bridgestone Turanza EL42 tires that came with the car. I survived two Boston winters, but go into this winter with new tires (Toyo Versados, fingers crossed...). I never got stuck nor in an accident. Just more use of the TC, ABS and increased awareness esp. at intersections, around corners and any hilly terrain.

My reasons for choosing the TL over the G35x in '05:

Much better interior and exterior style
Better interior materials & layout
FWD over AWD. I don't have a problem with FWD, given my driving style and I prefer not to haul around the added weight and complexity of AWD.
Smoother, quieter ride
Better mpg

I really enjoyed test driving the G and had I chosen it I'm sure I would not have regretted it. I just would have had to alter my priorities a bit. From what I've seen, the new G is a major improvement, I like the subtle style updates and the interior certainly has improved.

Drive 'em both a few times, you can't go wrong.

Scott: I thought I saw a G scaling Berkshire East!

scottm123

Hmm... wasn't me.
I'm the 140mph Blue Streak on the Mass Pike...

I don't know what this car has done to me, but it's like I'm 18 again.

I HAVE to calm down!!!! :surprise:

laurasdada

Good for you! Just avoid the other Blue Streaks on the Mass Pike, the one's with the badges, guns and revenue/tax (I mean) ticket books... :surprise:

dap2006

Shouldn't we be hearing something more definitive on the 2009? It seems like things are being kept under wraps for longer than I would expect...?? Thoughts...?? :confuse: :confuse:

scottm123

I'd give it until Spring before you start hearing anything containing actual facts.

wolveseatsheep

I wonder how much more the base 09's will be than the base 08's. I'm currently holding out to buy a new TL until the 09's come out, here's why: I figure that one of the following will be true:

(1) 09's will still offer FWD, then maybe they'll be no more than a couple grand more than the 08's. If so, then definitely it's worth waiting a few months to get the 09. I assume the 09 will have a nicer NAV and keyless entry/start, and whatever other fun state-of-the-art gizmos - I'm willing to wait and pay an extra $2k for that.

(2) 09's will have AWD standard (no FWD option), in which case I'm thinking TLs jump up $5k or so over current 08 prices. If this happens, then I'm hoping that the 08's will get quickly discounted as Gen 3 owners anxiously trade up, and I'll grab an '08 at invoice or less.

(3) 09's are much pricier (same as 2 above), but the 08's don't get discounted, and I end up paying as much for a TL 8 months from now than I would right now. This would suck, cause I'd sure rather have one right now.

What do y'all think about this theory? Which of the above 3 is most likely?