Howdy, Stranger!

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





Where is Honda taking Acura?

1101113151654

Comments

  • carguy58carguy58 Posts: 2,303
    That pic of the Accord looks like a combo the 98-02 model and the 04+ TSX in the headlights to me.
  • carguy58carguy58 Posts: 2,303
    From what I see on the top photo the roofline and hood do remind of the Charger. The back end shape reminds of the late 90's-present Hyundai Tiburons as said in your post. In my opinion the headlights width needs to be shortened a little bit because headlights look too long in widith from the side view. That top photo the Accord concept it looks mean looking though look a stealth fighter jet. Headlights look like the Acura Vigor from the side view I'm seeing. The Vigor always had those long headlights.

    "But this wouldn’t be the first time Honda has adopted some design elements going back 8-12 years. In fact, they seem to do it more often than not (the shape of tail lamp in 1998 Accord sedan seems to have come from 1987 Prelude’s, while 1998 Accord Coupe’s was clearly inspired by NSX that preceded it by 8-9 years, 1999 TL clearly derived its styling from 1992 Legend, 2001 CL and 2004 Accord Coupe seem to have used 1996-1998 Acura TL rear end styling and so on)."

    The 1999 TL style was derived from the Legend. where do you see that? 2001 CL and 04 Accord coupe have bubley back ends as opposed to the 96-98 TL which has a more boxy back end. Maybe the headlights of the 01 CL kinda have a 96-98 TL influence but the tailights are totally different on the the 01 CL as opposed to those on the 96-98 TL. The accord Coupe the headlights and grille are totally different from the Legend.
  • carguy58carguy58 Posts: 2,303
    "Problem with last CL and previous gen Acura coupe and last 2 gen Accord coupes was proportion. There is just something wrong about the profiles. They don't look quite right. Kind of blocky, tall."

    The 98-02 accord coupe was fine looking. The current Accord Coupe I agree it just doesn;t look right. The 2nd gen CL(01-03) I own one of them.
  • carguy58carguy58 Posts: 2,303
    I should also add the opening for the fog lights looks too big and the grille needs to be stretched out maybe a little to touch the headlights. The whole front end looks like "I'm gonna eat you for lunch".
  • danilodanilo Posts: 69
    As stated, It will take MORE than just HP and AWD to compete. The TSX is still based on the civic platform, And while that might not be so bad, it surely does not dictate such a hefty price. At current. it is a nice blend of luxury and yes value. Acura/Honda is and has maintained a "value" approach to their vehicles. That is what makes them a success. "I bought my TL because it is an excellent mix of performance, luxury, technology and value" So what if the TL were as pricey as the say BMW? Would it still be a good "value"?
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    I'm not sure they can engineer this into existance with the current SH-AWD platforms being AWD only.
    SH-AWD in its current form is adapted to be used in Honda's global midsize platform. In fact, the very first demonstration of SH-AWD was show using Japanese market Inspire (which is the American Honda Accord).
  • danilodanilo Posts: 69
    Well, I have to agree with you on that one. Keeping the TSX alone and having a TSX-S maybe with the additions you are suggesting at a premium.

    "Value" meaning bang for the buck, not cheap.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    It will definitely take more than just horsepower to compete with BMW 3-series. In fact, it isn't too difficult to beat BMW in power game. The 328i (which when equipped with cold weather package, nav, CD-changer, and leather can cost $40K-plus) has only 230 HP and 200 lb-ft.

    In fact, I don't want Acura to follow BMW. I want them to be themselves, like Honda did with S2000. They didn't take "lets put six cylinder engine and have the fastest car out there" route. They stuck with their formula going back as much as 34 years before the S2000 was launched.

    If there is one drawback TSX has today, it is from somewhat lack of power. Turbo charged I-4 (or V6 if possible) would address that, plus SH-AWD takes the game to whole another level where that power will actually be more meaningful. If it were solely about power, Accord can hold its own.

    BTW, Civic doesn't use Honda's global midsize platform. TSX uses that. Once again...
    -Economy Platform: Honda Fit
    -Compact Platform: Honda Civic, Acura CSX (basically a Civic).
    -Midsize Platform: Honda Accord, Acura TSX/TL/RL
    -Compact Light Truck Platform: Acura RDX, Honda CR-V
    -Midsize Light Truck Platform: Acura MDX, Honda Odyssey/Pilot/Ridgeline

    S2000 uses its own platform. There's the entire North American Honda/Acura lineup/platform for you.
  • danilodanilo Posts: 69
    TSX handles better that TL? What? Better Balance. 300 ponies will be hard to fit into the current TSX and stuffing that much engine will no doubt change the weight ratio which is why the TSX handles so well. SH-AWD could add some weight to the rear but will it be enough? I still do not see it as standard. Maybe an option. I agree RWD and sports sedans go hand and hand. Oh and a six cylinder vs a four as a rule(I'll get blasted for this) has a more useable torque curve and HP. Four's tend to work harder and need the rpm's way up. I have seen six's getting better MPG that four's
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    I don't see Charger using a fastback roofline that 2008 Accord coupe does (as do several cars including Audi TT, 350Z, MB CLS, Ferrari 456GT and even Hyundai Tiburon which was lambasted as being a blatant copy of the Ferrari). The adoption of fastback roofline is about where similarities with Tiburon end, IMO. I don't see *any* similarity at the tail.
    In fact, from what I've seen in the pictures, the Accord Coupe is an edgier version of the Civic Coupe's rear end which is rounded off. Perhaps one of the attempt was to help perceive it as being less bloated (and stylists have definitely succeeded in that regard).

    I see glimpse of 1992-1995 Legend in 1999 TL, in the tail, including the tail lamp itself. I said that when the car first came out.

    Between 1996-98 TL, 2001-2002 CL and 2003-2007 Accord Coupe, the similarities are quite pronounced. Sure, the 1996-98 TL was boxier, but the design elements were still carried forward in the CL and the Accord. Something as subtle as a horizontal crease that runs along the trunk lid, and the overall shape of the tail lamps. Its not "identical", its similar.
  • danilodanilo Posts: 69
    In fact, it isn't too difficult to beat BMW in the power game I have yet to see a 360hp/360tq V-8 or a 500hp V-10. Enough said.

    As for Acura, I agree they need to be themselves.

    Also agree with the TSX lack of power. It needs something
  • louisweilouiswei Posts: 3,717
    Due to Acura's unique tradition of offering only 1 engine per model I seriously doubt that the next gen TSX will come with engine choices. For the same reason I also don't see FWD as standard and SH-AWD as option. However, that might be the best situation for us customers which everyone could get what he/she wants.

    Of course 300 HP will be hard to fit into the current TSX but I do see the next one to grow bigger in size though. TL is actually already one of the largest entries in the entry level luxury performance sedan category. Couple more inches and 50 more HP plus SH-AWD for the next gen model would make it a fierce competitor to BMW's 5-series and Audi's A6.
  • louisweilouiswei Posts: 3,717
    I have yet to see a 360hp/360tq V-8 or a 500hp V-10. Enough said.

    The V8 Lexus puts on their IS-F is reported to put out 400+ HP and 360+ lb/ft.

    The V10 that goes into the LF-A is reported to have 500+ HP.
  • danilodanilo Posts: 69
    The TSX will have to grow significantly and that might be a good thing. the problem is not with the size/hp/SH-AWD or not, It lies with the bottom line price. While I agree the future of TSX is bright, We have to look at what it is up against. The G35/G45 for example. G35x ranges in the mid 30's Hell That is a lot for the money! The Audi's and BMW's are a totally different ride (and price).
  • danilodanilo Posts: 69
    Like I said yet to see and we are speaking of the Acura line up
  • louisweilouiswei Posts: 3,717
    First of all, there's no G45.

    The difference between G35 and 335i is smaller than you think. Actually it is more comparable between the G and 3er than A4 and 3er. I would agree that BMW is the benchmark in this segment but the A4 was never a strong competitor. Excellent handling? Yes. However, still pretty weak on the powertrain's part and overpriced.

    Take a look at the "Entry Level Luxury Performance Sedan" forum, nobody is talking about the A4 over there. It's like the car doesn't exist.

    Let's take a look at the current entry level luxury performance sedans price breakdown:

    BMW 335i: base MSRP at $39K, tops off at $53K
    BMW 328i: base MSRP at $33K, tops off at $49K
    Cadillac CTS 2.8: base MSRP at $31K, tops off at $41K
    Cadillac CTS 3.6: base MSRP at $34K, tops off at $43K
    Infiniti G35 Sport: base MSRP at $34K, tops off at $42K
    Lexus IS250: base MSRP at $32K, tops off at $40K
    Lexus IS350: base MSRP at $36K, tops off at $45K

    Based on the competitors' prices I'd say that a TSX with 300 HP V6, SH-AWD and loaded with Navi at $35K isn't a bad value at all.
  • danilodanilo Posts: 69
    Who said anything about an A4? I simply said Audi/BMW referring to the 5 er A6 comment. At 35K the TSX is simply going to be looked over, If you want to buy one than go ahead. When people are spending that much, they are also willing to go a few thousand for something better or at least "perceived to be better" ie" Infiniti, Lexus, BMW, Audi. Whether you agree or not really is not the issue. People are vain and will spend more for a "status". Do I agree? Not really but that is not the issue. BMW will most likely be the most expensive car on the planet. Does that make it better? No. Acura has the best "value",(oh please, it is), Gives the most bang for the buck. The RL flopped due to perceived lack of value. Great car just not a great value(again the sales tell the story). Got to be realistic in the price.
  • louisweilouiswei Posts: 3,717
    BTW, the current base TL is around $35K loaded and $38K for the TL-S and just in case you haven't figure it out, this is Acura's 3er fighter for now.

    All I am proposing is for TSX to take over TL's place in Acura's lineup so it and RL can move upmarket. This case Acura will have a complete sedan lineup without introducing another model.

    If a loaded 3-series fighter from Acura at around $35K isn't realistic then I don't know what is... :confuse:
  • danilodanilo Posts: 69
    You said it "I don't knoe what is"

    Nothing is........................
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    I don’t think TSX will grow in size, not unless Honda decides to put a V6 under the hood which I doubt will happen. It is likely to be the way it is today, and that is Japanese/European market Accord. It doesn’t need to grow. It is large enough as well as small enough for the car it aspires to be.

    Acura has offered multiple engines too.
    1996-98 TL had 2.5/I5 (170 HP) and 3.2/V6 (210 HP)
    1996-00 CL had 2.2-2.3/I4 (145-150 HP) and 3.0/V6 (200 HP)
    2007 TL is being offered with 3.2/V6 (258 HP) and 3.5/V6 (286 HP).

    In addition, Acura has offered multiple outputs from similar displacement in the past as well (Legend had 210 HP and 230 HP versions of 3.2/V6; Integra was offered with 140, 170 and 190 HP versions of 1.8-liter engines; second generation TL and CL got 225 HP and 260 HP versions of 3.2/V6).

    In case of next TSX, Acura offering 2.3-turbo similar to one being used in RDX is highly anticipated. I suspect the normally aspirated 2.4/I-4 will continue for base, and should.

    Speaking of 300 HP, even that is possible in the world of turbos. The only question would be, does Acura want to go there with TSX? They could if necessary, but perhaps will settle for 260 HP or may be 280 HP at the most.

    Allowing a sport packaged TSX doesn't really need to affect base TL (except that I hope it moves to a RWD platform along with RL). TL could still start around $35K and top out in low 40s with power and SH-AWD. And let "full sized" RL take things from there. But at this point, this is something I hope from Acura.
Sign In or Register to comment.