Howdy, Stranger!

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





Acura TSX

13435373940164

Comments

  • venus537venus537 Posts: 1,443
    150 lbs is not much and the more powerful engine and tighter suspension with an extremely tight structure will more than compensate. the tsx is more than handling. the light weight engine with its broad torque curve and drive by wire throttle seems desirable to me. many of us have been clamoring for an european accord to be available in our market and now it is going to be here. this is a good thing. i really never have gotten into a sentra based sedan.
  • hunter001hunter001 Posts: 851
    A lot of people mistakenly think that the G20 was based off of the Sentra platform, like the other poster who assumed that the TSX was based off of a Civic. The G20 did share an engine that coincidentally developed similar power to that of a high-end Sentra. There were no other similarities.

    The TSX "on paper", does have an exceptionally good 4-cylinder engine, however. It has a very broad torque curve too. Nobody builds 4-cylinder engines better than Honda. But I really wish Honda had developed a small RWD Sedan based off the S2000 and equipped with a small V6/I6.

    Later...AH
  • venus537venus537 Posts: 1,443
    i stand corrected.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    hunter001
    Whoa there ! Who is talking about 35K BMWs ? Pop into your neighborhood Honda Store and you will find those there for less money !!
    Comparing Used Car prices to New Car prices now? FYI, a year or two down the road, TSX will also be available at used car lots, and not with its new car price tag.

    Additionally, you will also find a 240HP kick-azz V6 with 200+ lbs/ft of turbine smooth torque, also for "less money".
    For most people, that will work. More people will buy Accord EXV6 than would go for TSX. Those, who want a sport sedan in a well-appointed package (Accord EXV6 may not be less money than TSX), with six speed manual transmission, TSX will be more car.

    I am talking about the TSX. The TSX does not offer a power seat for the passenger, even though the cheaper Accord next door offers it.
    But the Accord doesn't offer a better audio system, xenon or sport package. If you go by feature list, TSX will win over Accord. But if passenger side power seat is what moves you, then yes, TSX doesn't seem to have it, although Accord EXV6 does. That said, if I were to look at BMW 325, I would have to pay a $2K premium. Even then I get vinyl seats, no driver side and passenger side power seat. BMW wants more money for these basic features that you expect in a near-luxury car.

    If you need it, you can get 8-way power seats for the driver and passenger, with 3 position memory for seats and mirrors with reverse gear-tilt-down, in the BMW 3 series. You cannot get passenger power seats in the Acura, whether you want to pay for it or not !! It is not available for any money. Period.
    I can't get 200 HP in BMW 325 for more money, can I?

    I did not factor out hip room or shoulder room. Factoring in head-room, hip-room and shoulder room, the TSX is less roomy than a Honda Civic. Hope that clears up any confusion.
    It would be nice to back up your claim. Still, 91 cu. ft is greater than 88 cu. ft. if that is something we must prove.

    I really like that Honda is retaining the Double-wishbones for all their cars (till recently) and that they have retained that in their Accord (and the TSX). That does not mean that super-premium marques like Porsche and BMW - known all over the world for their handling and tractability - have got it all wrong when they equipped their cars with the suspensions they have.
    I just mentioned a fact. People like to associate MacPherson Struts with cheapness. Scroll back a few pages in this thread and figure out who would. I understand performance is more about tuning than simply the type of suspension used. The problem, some will try to discredit certain things either way. I'm sure you realize that double wishbone layout creates a packaging issue and is not the best choice to increase the cabin volume. Don't you?

    Let us not go overboard with "paper features". Hell, even when Mario Andretti tested a bunch of cars including the Porsche 911, the Acura NSX, one of the Ferraris, the Viper, the Corvette, the Lotus Espirit etc., the Porsche came out tops, beating out the NSX, which in turn beat out the Ferrari and so on. Mario (being Italian) really wanted to recommend the Ferrari (with double wishbones all around) but did not, since driving at 10/10ths, the Porsche (with struts and Porsche's unique multi-link in the rear) stomped all over the other cars, for handling.
    I'm sure you're talking about the article published in R&T a few years ago. Well, the Ferrari wasn't even close, and you might want to read again about the NSX versus Carrera 4S comment of yours, because I remember it, very well.

    The G20 and the TSX are similar concepts. Both cars from Japanese companies, tuned for handling. Both built in Japan. Both with 4-bangers. Both with front-wheel-drive.
    Okay.

    Years back when the G20 was introduced, 140HP was "okay"
    Is it? The last G20, I believe, was released in 1998. How much horsepower did Integra GS-R have, in 1992?

    nowadays, 200HP is "okay"
    Where does 184 HP stand today?

    It is also lighter than the TSX by around 150+ lbs and hence should be more tossable, even though it is dimensionally larger.
    This is really a good one. While your opinion may be based on comparison between BMW 325 beating BMW M3 in terms of tossability due to being 200 lb. lighter, I doubt Accord Sedan stands any chance of being more tossable than TSX.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    I suppose you must be aware that both of these cars (TSX and Accord) are built on the same platform by the same manufacturer, with identical suspension under-pinnings, with one being lighter than the other ?
    Under pinning is one thing, tuning it is another. Accord has a touring suspension, while the chassis in the TSX is even more stiff (that is where the additional weight comes from) besides sports suspension and a different steering setup as well.
     
    The selling point of the TSX is not power or 7 secs 0-60. The selling point is handling. The selling point of the Infiniti G20 was also handling
    Based on the initial reviews, and my observation, TSX's selling point is more than just handling. It is its chassis and composure, the drive train and the feature content for the price. At $24K, G20 couldn't deliver much.
  • varmintvarmint Posts: 6,326
    "The TSX seems nice enough, but the Accord V-6 is considerably roomier, faster, gets better gas mileage, is just as luxurious (save a few minor items), weighs about the same or maybe less. The only real disadvantage of the Accord is that it does not handle as well (we will know for sure when the TSX arrives). Given that the Accord is also cheaper than the TSX, I imagine that the money saved on the Accord could be put into making its handling on par with (or close to) that of the TSX."

    Which is why Honda will sell hundreds of thousands of Accords, but only expects to sell a few thousand TSXs. The Accord will meet the majority of the market demand. With that covered, Acura can exploit a small niche and offer something that fans of the older, smaller, more nimble Accords have missed in recent offerings.
  • creakid1creakid1 Posts: 2,032
    In '94, I test drove the best handling 4-cyl compact sedan from Nissan - G20 - & BMW - 318i. There was no comparison. My impression, "the G20 is a total crude vehicle." The short-travel suspension's firm & shallow ride comfort, the more inert/wooden & less-direct steering/handling, and the slightly-bigger but coarse & noisier engine are all so clearly a notch or 2 below the E36 Beemer.

    I expect the long-travel-suspension TSX to ride more comfy than the 3-series w/ sport suspension, which got shorter travel than the regular suspension. & the refinement, such as quietness, should be on par w/ the Beemer. Unlike the G20. Again, I expect the E46 Beemer's steering feedback to be still way ahead.

    In '98, the G20(II) w/ beam rear got criticized by CR as having worse ride/handling compromise than the G20(I).
  • hunter001hunter001 Posts: 851
    About that comment about the price of the Honda Accord EX V6 being a "used car price", the Honda Accord EX V6 with the 5-speed Automatic and the 240HP and 212Lbs/ft of Torque engine, along with the Voice Activated Navigation system, has an MSRP of $28,260. This is the top of the line Accord with every option imaginable. The True Market Value (TMV) of this car is $26,392.

    The TSX with the 4-cylinder and 200HP and 166lbs/ft of torque engine, with the Navigation system and 5-speed Auto, is expected to sell for $29,000. The Honda costs less money and we are not comparing the TSX with the 4-cylinder Honda Accord (which would have taken another $2500 off the price mentioned above). If the TSX sells for MSRP (as I expect it would), there is a big spread right there. Is that clear enough ?

    Also another one of those gems about the 184hp in the 325 not being able to be upgraded, I laughed out aloud. Have you heard of other engines like the 3.0L I-6 (330) and the 3.2L I-6 (M3) from BMW ? LOL. We would not be able to upgrade the 2.4L 4-cylinder engine in the TSX, can we ? Unless we upgrade to larger vehicles like the TL/RL etc. LOL. But then moving to a larger vehicle, defeats the whole purpose of a smaller-than-US-accord-euro-accord, doesn't it ? With the BMW, you can get the same vehicle with a lot more engine/power options, ranging from a budget buy (325i) to a world beater (M3) with an SMG transmission.

    A clarification on the space in the Civics....All Civic sedans (including DX, LX, Hybrid etc - in fact most of the Civics sold) excluding the EX, have more interior room than the TSX, after factoring in the headroom, shoulder room, legroom and every other parameter we can think of. The Honda Civic EX has a whisker less room, because it is less taller in the inside than the TSX. If both the EX and the TSX had the same interior height, the Honda Civic EX would also have had more interior room than the TSX. Hope that clears up any confusion.

    Basically, most people are interested in a TSX, since they assume that it is slightly smaller and sportier than the US-spec Accord. But they would rethink a bit if they knew that they were getting a vehicle whose interior size is smaller than a Honda Civic for more money than the top of the line Accord EX V6. JMHO.

    Much as I enjoy posting these things, I guess I will refrain from further posts on this issue again. Basically folks who spend their money have to make an informed decision; as opposed to a decision based on partial information. I am sure whoever buys these vehicles would be a happy customer, either way !

    Later...AH
  • creakid1creakid1 Posts: 2,032
    While playing around inside my cousin's base C220, I found the passenger seat's got all the bells & whistles all in manual form. I actually find cranking all the handles & knobs "enjoyable" 'cause it's like playing a Tanka toy! ;-) Yeah, pwr motor sucks! That pwr driver seat got no memory anyway.

    So the BMW 3-series' base sport seats are ideal, 'cause both manual seats got enormous varieties of adjustability! Too bad the less-comfortable sport suspension has to be included in the 2wd 325i w/ these seats.

    So if I'm getting a BMW, I'd get the least-expensive 325i(to avoid the sport suspension) 2wd(to avoid the larger turning circle & etc.) and invest another $1500 just to order one manual cloth sport driver seat(hopefully the pwr lumbar can be included for an additional cost) from the parts dept. I wouldn't invest further $ for the passenger seat. The original driver seat will remain new in the storage until the car is sold again as "a used car w/ an un-used driver seat". But when extending the sport seat's super-cool thigh-length adjustment, I found the support a little less than perfect 'cause the lateral support didn't get extended! Anyway, another choice for any car is to put a long-thigh super-supportive Monaco seat for around $600 including custom installation, but the seat height/angle got only a small range of adjustments & need tools to do it. So the initial height/angle had to be chosen carefully. If the side airbag is built into the OEM seat, then it has to leave the car altogether, too.

    I feel sorry for those "typical" 3-series buyers that spend all that $ on those optional head-room-rubbing moonroof & leather pwr less-comfy-non-sport seats, which lack lateral support & thigh-length adjustment, plus it doesn't EVEN got a thigh-height adjustment! No wonder DC doesn't feel embarrassed offering a cheap-flimsy-feeling crank for the thigh-height adjustment in the base new C-class, 'cause even a loaded 330i w/o sport package don't got one! W/ the pwr seat motors, 2 rear passengers in a 3-series sedan can only extend their feet forward under the front seats in a crooked way, & there's not even room left under the front seats for the 3rd passenger's feet.

    That C220, which I've been only playing around its manual passenger seat, eventually needed a $2000 repair on this non-memory driver seat's pwr feature. & the non-manufacturer's extended warranty is NOT covering it! Once again, pwr seats suck! & being single, I don't even care about the expensive memory feature.

    Another nice thing about manual seats is that you can count the number of notches or turns & return to its original seating position. W/ non-memory pwr seats, you can't!
  • creakid1creakid1 Posts: 2,032
    Beemers, TSX, I doubt if I'd appreciate a sunroof in there. Maybe, & just maybe the tall Mazda3's got the room for "the fun of letting the sun shine in".

    A steel manual tilt roof like 924/Scirocco(I) doesn't slide & probably doesn't take up the head room. & it's better than nothing, 'cause the hot air can be pushed right out over the driver's head by the strong A/C's comfy draft.

    A glass roof is nice too when closed, for viewing the sky scrapers quietly & comfortably when the hot sun's not around. However, when tilted to vent the hot air out, the hot sun beams also shoot in. A sliding vented shade, whether the vents are more forward or backward, helps to block most of the sun beams but still allows the baking effect to flow into the cabin when the roof is shut. The more forward-located vent opening may direct the sun beams away from the passengers, but its air-sucking location also provides not as much refreshing feeling for the front passengers' head than the more-rearward-located vent does.

    So a tilt-able steel roof is still the ideal for vacuuming hot air out comfortably for the front passengers.

    My made-in-West-Germany '84 Jetta(I) coupe's manual steel sliding roof is not leaking even today.

    Interestingly, my made-in-Japan '93 Camry SE sedan's pwr sliding & tilt glass roof is leaking air. Any one knows the cure?
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    Honda Accord EX V6 with the 5-speed Automatic and the 240HP and 212Lbs/ft of Torque engine, along with the Voice Activated Navigation system, has an MSRP of $28,260.

    True.

    The TSX with the 4-cylinder and 200HP and 166lbs/ft of torque engine, with the Navigation system and 5-speed Auto, is expected to sell for $29,000.

    Probably close. It could be $26K and $28K (w/NAV) though. We should know in a few days.

    The Honda costs less money and we are not comparing the TSX with the 4-cylinder Honda Accord (which would have taken another $2500 off the price mentioned above). If the TSX sells for MSRP (as I expect it would), there is a big spread right there. Is that clear enough ?

    Oh yes. Now, since we made a big deal about comparing the two cars based on engine output, let us throw in the other things into the mix. Let us start with Accord EX which has an MSRP of about $24K.

    Add Xenon Headlamps
    Add Side Curtain Airbag
    Add Vehicle Stability System
    Upgraded Seats
    Upgrade Audio System (TSX has a 360 Watt audio output w/8-speakers)
    Sport Package (Chassis tweaks including revised suspension)
    P215/50/R17 wheels (Accord EX has P205/60/R16)
    Auto-dimming Rear View Mirrors (optional in Accord)
    Home Link Transmitter
    Two Power Outlets (I believe Accord has one)
    Electric Trunk Open/Close Switch (Accord has mechanical system to open only)
    Illuminated buttons on doors

    And while we can ignore some other fancy stuff like stainless steel door sill plates and speed sensing wiper etc. to be found in TSX compared to the Accord, how much do you think the above features will add to the cost of any car as an upgrade? And then we can talk about cost of adding 4-way passenger side power seat. Accord EX doesn't offer it either. BTW, I have ignored the drivetrain comparison of Accord's version of K24A to that of TSX version of K24A.

    Also another one of those gems about the 184hp in the 325 not being able to be upgraded, I laughed out aloud.

    And you still didn't get it. It was on you, BTW. I had my fill this afternoon reading your post about buyers not having the option to pay more for something.

    Well, if I were paying near luxury price for BMW 325, I would expect those so called basic items included. May be, there are buyers who don't expect much from their $28K, I'm not one of them.

    Have you heard of other engines like the 3.0L I-6 (330) and the 3.2L I-6 (M3) from BMW ? LOL.

    And have you heard of "TL"? Adding cost to TSX does not make sense, as TL will be the step up from TSX, including all the tidbits that you’re willing to pay for. It may be a larger car, but that is also a plus for many, besides getting a powerful V6 option. Technically, they are still cousins, TSX being more like 2.5TL replacement.

    A clarification on the space in the Civics....All Civic sedans (including DX, LX, Hybrid etc - in fact most of the Civics sold) excluding the EX, have more interior room than the TSX, after factoring in the headroom, shoulder room, legroom and every other parameter we can think of.

    I asked you to back up the claim. Post facts. And then, I expect TSX to be as compact as it is, given the chassis setup. The point of TSX is not to deliver another family sedan, Accord at the lower end, and TL at the upper end are going to take care of those needs.
    That said, car's size has no proportionality attached to its price tag, or does it? You seem to be fascinated by the size comparisons of Civic and TSX (and forget that BMW 3-series, Audi A4 are actually still smaller). If you have complaints about TSX's dimensions, you must be looking at, at least, BMW 5-series then.

    Basically, most people are interested in a TSX, since they assume that it is slightly smaller and sportier than the US-spec Accord. But they would rethink a bit if they knew that they were getting a vehicle whose interior size is smaller than a Honda Civic for more money than the top of the line Accord EX V6. JMHO.

    Believe me, TSX will be grabbed by a lot of smart buyers who would know what they want, and need. For them, size compared to Civic wouldn't be a distraction, as I doubt it is, with BMW 3-series and Audi A4 buyers (both cars smaller than Civic) and VW Passat (a car nearly identical in interior dimensions to the TSX).

    If you find this discussion interesting, no point in quitting. Response awaited.
  • merc1merc1 Posts: 6,081
    Wow, all this over an 25K Acura. Acura has partially done their job.

    M
  • creakid1creakid1 Posts: 2,032
    I see few cars in the carpool lane. So "who cares" about the lack of rear leg room. As these pathetically-cramped Accords prior to '98 have been best sellers forever. Even Civics got more rear leg room to stretch out in the back! In '83, the fwd Camry proved that even a 173in-length sedan can provide more leg room to stretch out than a full-size Chevy Caprice.

    I pointed out somewhere earlier that an old tiny winnie little '82 Accord sedan was quieter than my brand-new roomier '90 Protege. I envy small quiet cars.

    Ford of Europe pointed out that there's not much future for the Mondeo-sized car on this crowded earth. So I don't see much future for the Mazda6/TSX(or anything bigger) either, especially w/ the SUV-size turning circle to make buyers feel like they're driving a big (& therefore safe) car. Volvo is not insecure enough to use this to prove it's toughness. Rwd Volvos only need 32.2ft curb to curb. TSX's 40ft...

    Again, tall short roomy cars like the Mazda3, w/ structure by Volvo, is the way to go. I'm just assuming that it must have a relatively small turning circle as this earth only allows that, 'cause Mazda's other roomy sedan, the 6, doesn't got one.
  • himilerhimiler Posts: 1,209
    Once again, you have distorted my statements.

    I was making a comparison between the relative EFFECTIVENESS of struts vs. wishbones, not a comparison of COST.

    Struts work better in BMWs and Porsches (as opposed to FWD cars) because A) they are RWD or AWD cars, and B) those builders' suspension engineers take great pains to tune them, something you're not likely to find in an "economy" carmaker (with the exception of the Celica GTS duly noted).

    Unless you were napping, I've already made the point about how the use of strut in BMWs and Porsches allows the passenger space to be maximized while maintaining a smaller footprint in the road (which is good for making a car more nimble).

    Given the comparable interior dimensions of the Civic and TSX, your reasoning indicates that perhaps Acura should've gone ahead and used struts, too. The reduced cost and increase in interior room would've effectively dispelled the Accord/TSX contention, as well.

    You seem to be continually confused about the fact that the TSX is a FWD vehicle and the 3-series is RWD. Given your obvious knowledge, you must surely realize that a car's handling is greatly impacted by the configuration of its drivetrain.

    If you're intent upon making item-by-item feature comparisons between cars ("My dad can beat up your dad!"), you wouldn't be doing your own credibilty and perceived objectivity any harm by comparing "apples to apples."
  • varmintvarmint Posts: 6,326
    "Wow, all this over an 25K Acura. Acura has partially done their job."

    Well said. Post of the day. LOL!
  • c3po33c3po33 Posts: 60
    Saw the TSX in the Ft. Lauderdale auto show this weekend. I like the car a lot. I wanted my wife to get one but she has a TL-S now and thought the car was a step down for her. The reason she is looking at another car is she is starting to have her transmission slip on her type S but she loves her car, she had a 97 CL before this. I guess we'll wait 7-8 months hopefully and see the 2004 TL by then. For the price though I think the TSX is a great car. By the way the salesman there said around $25,000 without nav and about $28,000 with nav. He also said there was no price difference between auto or manual (which I found odd).
  • varmintvarmint Posts: 6,326
    It is odd that pricing information is not yet available. Acura is holding their cards close per usual.

    It may be true that there will be no difference in price between the auto and manual tranny. In most econo-cars, the stick is the cheaper transmission. But, with many of the sporting 6 speeds, those manuals gears are considered a performance upgrade and cost a bit more than the automatic version. I think Nissan is one of the companies to do this. I can see things getting expensive with the alloy tranny housing they used for the TSX. If the 6 speed is cheaper, I wouldn't expect it to be a significant difference.
  • howachowac Posts: 52
    Not sure of the validity of this, but it appears to be the most credible info on MSRP so far. Check out this clubtsx.com thread:

    http://www.clubtsx.com/bbs/showthread.php?s=ec9b977ba0341de93818e- b2a7ec7af43&threadid=1147
  • Apparently a car dealer employee out in California claims he recently spotted a TSX that had been mistakenly loaded onto a delivery truck. He states the hauler let him look at the vehicle and, when he did, he saw a sticker price of $26,990 (incl. destination).

    Talk about sticker shock.
  • kyfdxkyfdx Posts: 31,124
    I hate to say it, but that price doesn't surprise me at all. Figure the new redesigned 2004 TL to come in about $1K higher than it goes for now, that makes it $30.5K. $27K for the TSX that is loaded slots it in about right. No comment on the value side of that equation, though.

    kyfdx

    MODERATOR
    Prices Paid, Lease Questions, SUVs

  • himilerhimiler Posts: 1,209
    Sticker prices on premium brands usually incorporate a little extra "cushion" (or sometimes a big one) to give the dealer the opportunity to deal on the car and still make a decent profit.

    The ~$27,000 sticker isn't a surprise to me, since Acura is marketing the TSX agaist some higher-priced metal. I think the price is in line with what people shopping in this segment would expect, particularly in light of the standard kit level.

    As usual, value can only be determined by the person signing the check.
  • varmintvarmint Posts: 6,326
    That's about $500 more than I was hoping, but not outrageous in the least. One poster in that thread mentioned the possibility that the price includes destination charges. It's been a while since I bothered to look at stickers (what good are they...). Anyone know if that's true of Acura?
  • himilerhimiler Posts: 1,209
    I would tend to think that MSRP always includes destination, since you usually hear "tax, tags, and title extra" after you hear the price.

    Could be mistaken, though.
  • gee35coupegee35coupe Posts: 3,475
    They'll go I'm sure.
  • Well now, honestly can you say that this new tri-lettered Acura can really be worth that many $$$'s more than the Sebring sedan? Chrysler is too often left out of these discussions, probably because people think they are unreliable. But, if you have been reading the news these past years...Chrysler has actually been rated as good as BMW and better than Mercedes by none other than Consumer Reports, the same publication that lambasted past Chryslers for their reliability issues.

    The Chrysler sebring is a beautiful car, and has a sweet intereior. It is worth a look. and yes, it does have 200hp...and I can bet that it has more torque than the Acura. what do you all think?
  • himilerhimiler Posts: 1,209
    It doesn't offer the same chassis dynamics as the TSX, and also lacks the Acura's brand cachet and overall refinement.

    With all the recent action in the mid-sized sedan category (Altima, Mazda6, new Accord, fresh Camry), the Sebring has fallen off the radar for a lot of folks.

    Not to knock on the Sebring, but it really doesn't play in the same league as the TSX.
  • bbartlow1bbartlow1 Posts: 22
    200 ponies from a 2.4 Four? Nice. But something tells me the Accord 2.4 will last longer, and maybe lots. Although probably not a factor for those who keep'em under 200,000 miles.

    Take care, you canyon carvin' devils...
  • himilerhimiler Posts: 1,209
    The '96 Integra LS I owned needed a top-end rebuild at 221,000 miles (new valves, springs, and other goodies).

    The car that replaced it, a '98 Integra GS-R (170hp from 1.8L), was driven much harder than the LS, and now has 226K on the clock.

    The GS-R has yet to use a drop of oil since its break-in period.

    The DOHC VTEC engines are built to tighter tolerances, employ oil-jet piston cooling, and usually incorporate some fairly exotic materials in the block and cylinder walls (carbon fiber and ceramics).

    All things being equal, I think a DOHC VTEC engine will last longer than one that's SOHC VTEC simply because it's essentially over-built.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    I was making a comparison between the relative EFFECTIVENESS of struts vs. wishbones, not a comparison of COST.

    You're partially correct. You don't always bring in cost, especially when you talk about BMW. Then it just comes down to tuning and packaging and how well BMW engineers can tune what they have got to play with.

    Struts work better in BMWs and Porsches

    Double wishbones wouldn't? Given same tuning effort, do you think double wishbones will make a difference?

    Given the comparable interior dimensions of the Civic and TSX, your reasoning indicates that perhaps Acura should've gone ahead and used struts, too.

    Did you notice me whine about the interior volume of TSX? For me, it is large enough car, and the couple of inches lost in the cabin as a compromise in favor of a sophisticated suspension layout doesn't bug me, but to some, apparently it does!

    You seem to be continually confused about the fact that the TSX is a FWD vehicle and the 3-series is RWD.
    I will give TSX a serious look when the purchase time comes. If it turns out to be a great package for my needs (and that doesn't include driving on a race track), it will be my choice over Accord or just about any car in the price class. TSX appears to have enough standard features and more than enough handling capability for my needs on a daily basis. FWD versus RWD debate is pretty much useless, and often used as an excuse, IMO. It is the package that counts, for me. TSX promises to deliver a good one at a good price in a competitive class.
This discussion has been closed.