Older Acura TLs

bartalk3

Horsepower up and MPG up, too, with a 6 speed transmission? Maybe on the highway, but probably not around town.

And what about torque steer with 300hp and added torque?

I'd much prefer, say, a rear camera to more power.

goodegg

I suspect your rear seats are not perforated. The TL's front and back seats are. I'd hate to have mud inside the seat.

bodble2

You're right about cloth seats and dirt, but I was thinking more about SUVs, wagons, minivans, etc, rather than a sedan, being better suited to transporting bigger dogs.

BTW, did the emotorcons change color, or is it just my computer? They're lighter shade now! :confuse:

habitat1

You are darn right, let it begin:

300hp in a FWD car is ridiculous and outright dangerous, I will keep on saying it untill the manufacturers get it right.

Well, Billy, I have to give you two thumbs up on that assessment. Not to mention that adding excessive horsepower to a FWD car is pretty much useless when it comes to performance.

That 300hp / 323 ft. lb. Impala SS that someone referred to was rated by Motor Trend at 0-60 in 6.0 seconds. Not much faster than my 12 year old 190 horsepower FWD Maxima. And well slower than the previous generation 240 hp RWD BMW M3. Chevy would do a lot better upgrading their antiquated 4-speed automatic transmission and loose fitting chassis/suspension than droppoing more horsepower into a FWD drivetrain.

P.S. Just for another fun comparison, my rear engine RWD 911S at 355 horsepower/295 ft lbs can outrun a front engine/RWD 400hp/400 ft lb Corvette that weighs less than the Porsche. And, on my return trip over the Fourth, I averaged 26.7 mpg at an average speed of 71mph (up to 90 for several short runs). Which is about what I used to get on my (lighter) 190hp FWD Maxima. Chevy (and Acura) need to send their engineers to a physics class before they take FWD platforms to an even more dangerous and useless level.

daisy9

I have found a fitted bench seat cover at a pet store. It says the 30" cover fits many cars (including the accord). I was wondering if anyone knew the measurements of the TL's back seat. My TL is, as predicted, at work with the hubby and the pathfinder is outside in the driveway.
I agree, Max, that the pathfinder is nice- I do love it. The new ones really put the driver up high, which I like surprisingly. It is a big decision about what type of vehicle to get. SUV, crossover, car??
And SaraC, I think they need better colors too. I sort of wish I chose the 'Desert Mist" though. I saw one yesterday- the windows were tinted a little and it looked very nice. Now that I own a grey car I realize just how many grey cars are on the road- a lot!!!!

boe_d

I think that if enough people let them know they should add a poll section to their web page, they might get the idea of what is more important HP or MPG. I think in the end they'll have a reasonable divide and make a type s that sucks down gas but gets 320HP and then a gas sipping model that gets about 255 HP but gets about 40 MPG based on a hybrid engine that uses new recyclable lithium cell batteries and an optional plug in. You probably won't save money on the hybrid but at least the batteries are
recyclable, it will reduce your trips to the gas station, better for the environment and less dependence on countries that have been at war internally and with their neighbors for 3000 years. Oh and if they do get it to 40mpg you can use the HOV lane in many states. http://www.acura.com/help/help_feed_index.asp?bhcp=1

They tried to get close to this with the accord but the technology wasn't quite right yet. Without the HOV incentive (MPG not high enough) not enough people were interested. The older hybrid technology they used in the accord wasn't quite efficient enough to get the MPG where it needed to be. Using the newer technology as the next generation prius (est 80MPG) might get the acura up to 40mpg.

bodble2

"Not much faster than my 12 year old 190 horsepower FWD Maxima"

Not true. Only the initial test of a manual 5-speed Maxima yielded a sub-7 second 0-60 time. I suspect that car was a pre-production factory ringer. Subsequent tests of automatic tranny Maximas had times in the low to mid 8 seconds. So an automatic Impala would be "much faster".

Your 911 may be able to outrun the Corvette, but bang for the buck, the 'Vette is right up there with the 911, if not ahead.

BTW, the 'Vette won C & D Best Performance Car. The Boxster, not the 911, won Best Luxury Sports Car. And now they have the Cayman, which has supplanted the 911 as the best Porsche with a roof.

But enough about the 911, back to the TL....

priggly

That 300hp / 323 ft. lb. Impala SS that someone referred to was rated by Motor Trend at 0-60 in 6.0 seconds. Not much faster than my 12 year old 190 horsepower FWD Maxima. And well slower than the previous generation 240 hp RWD BMW M3. Chevy would do a lot better upgrading their antiquated 4-speed automatic transmission and loose fitting chassis/suspension than droppoing more horsepower into a FWD drivetrain.

FYI the 0-60 time for the SS is 5.6 sec, not 6.0 sec., according to both GM and Car & Driver. And this with minimal torque steer, as opposed to the ridiculous statement to the effect that a powerful FWD car is "dangerous." Any car is dangerous if an idiot drives it. The SS also has a top end of 154 mph, 1 mph slower than the current M3. And while we are on the subject of performance, the SS gets 18 mpg in the city (US gallon) and 28 on the highway while the M3 gets 16 and 23, respectively, with the 6-speed SMG transmission.

As for GM's four-speed "antiquated" transmission, it is well known that it is one of the most bulletproof and smoothest transmissions on the market. It does not hesitate indecisively and jerk (unlike the Avalon, Camry and ES350), it does not demonstrate harmonic vibration (unlike the TL) and it does not intrude in any way upon the occupants' serenity in the quiet interior of the SS. It is, furthermore, simply a superb match for Chevy's six cylinder engines and the wonderful 5.3 liter small block V-8 in the SS. The current trend by some car makers towards 5,6 and even 7 speed transmissions with their problematic nature due to overcomplexity and underreliability is leading to more and more complaints by owners as evidenced on the various automotive boards. Just what is so commendable about that?! It is more a tribute to advertising effectiveness than to engineering prowess and to form following function as it always should.

Have you even personally driven the SS? I suggest before you get on here and make derisive and inaccurate remarks about the car you at least know what you are talking about.

ggesq

"FYI the 0-60 time for the SS is 5.6 sec, not 6.0 sec., according to both GM and Car & Driver. And this with minimal torque steer, as opposed to the ridiculous statement to the effect that a powerful FWD car is "dangerous."

I thought C & D stated that the SS has too much torque steer as well as giving it a somewhat poor review??

IMHO- while the SS is nice, it is NOT an entry level luxury performance sedan. Further, the current SS because of its FWD platform basically sits in the middle of ITS OWN market segment. :P

taxesquire

Just wanted to chime in that I enjoyed your post...

billyperks1

So with this remarkable and superior technology devoted to the SS- 4 speed automatic, minimal torque steer and low cabin noise, why is that an inferior car like the TL- with its torque steer, harmonic vibration and fading dash outsells the SS by thousands of units on any given day?

I just can't seem to figure that out, with all your wisdom and eloqence,can you answer that question for me, please?

bodble2

Thank you! We aim to please.

pat

Assuming the TL's back seat still does not fold down, you may have a problem attaching it to the back of the seat. I believe the Accord's backseats do fold down, so it could be you are supposed to tie it around the back of the seat to hold it in place.

I ran into that very problem several years ago. I managed to get the ties hooked around the head restraints, but that was less than satisfactory and soon became waaay too much trouble. :sick:

sarac

How likely do you think it is that information from the upcoming Nemacolin preview on the 2007 TL will make its way to the web to groups like this?

taxesquire

I don't have a dog, so I'm not sure if this will work for you, but the TL does have teather-attachments behind the back seats (where the speakers are, I think). Maybe you could take a piece of twine and tie your tarp or sheet to the teather-anchor.

pat

Hmm, my car doesn't have them, but maybe that idea will help Daisy. What are they for?

bodble2

"What are they for?"

The tether anchors? They are for baby carseats! I guess you don't have kids yet! :P

kennyg8

I use the tethers for holding down the dog :P Short leash required

daisy9

I will check out the car's back seat area tomorrow. I will look to see if these tethers are there. I am seriously considering going to the pet store and getting the cover and trying it out. I will let everyone know how and if it works out. To be continued.....
Daisy

maximafan

I think I have to disagree with you, bodble2,
about a sub-8 0-60 time on an auto tranny
Maxima. Are you referring to a '94 Maxima
getting a sub-8 0-60 time with an auto
tranny? Even that I find hard to believe.
Now, the year 2000 up through 2003
automatic models got in the low 7 second 0-60
range. And I'm almost positive my '02 auto
tranny Maxima goes 0-60 in at least under
7.5 seconds. This car is quick!

Also, didn't Car and Driver a few months
back get a 0-60 time of 6.1 seconds in a
Current auto-tranny Maxima in the $30,000
sedan shootout? I just can't believe or
imagine a Maxima getting an 8 second 0-60
time. The numbers for the current Maxima
instead of a '94 Maxima would seem to be more
in line with a current generation Impala SS.

maximafan

Daisy9, I'll be looking for your next post
whenever you find a good alternative. I
have to say to everyone with the pets, you
gotta love America! Our pets our like our
family. Ah, the things we do for our pets
(and to protect our cars!).

Seriously, though, this is really important
to me in considering the TL for my next lease
or purchase 'cause the split-fold seats
really do help solve that problem for me.
Oh, boy! I can't tell you how many little
things add up on all the different cars that
I'm interested in that can either be a pro
or a con. Some things are minimal that I can
live with, others aren't. I'm beginning to
realize that finding the perfect car that
meets my needs, i.e, styling, decent mpg's,
roomy, but not too large; enough attention
to detail, offerings of neat little
accoutrements, a car that has really good
acceleration and has decent pricing, is a
challenge!

To be continued....

bodble2

I'm not sure about the current Maxima, or the pre-'95 version. My reference was to the '95 - '99 generation because habitat1 has a 1995 5-speed Maxima and he said the Impala SS isn't much faster. I don't remember the exact issue of Car & Driver, but I know over the years they tested a few of the '95 - '99 Maximas, and the slowest time they recorded for an automatic was around 8.1 - 8.3 seconds.

habitat1

FYI the 0-60 time for the SS is 5.6 sec, not 6.0 sec., according to both GM and Car & Driver.

Yeah, we all drive like the kids that work for Car and Driver, don't we? Like standing on the brake and accelerator at the same time before "launching" an automatic transmission car. Or dropping the clutch at 6,000 rpm in a manual. They managed to get the new Porsche 911S from 0-60 in 3.9 seconds. The other car magazines had it at 4.1 to 4.4. Porsche itself doesn't lose any pride in publishing a ultra conservative figure like 4.6. But not GM. Oh no - if Car and Driver drove the SS off a vertical cliff and managed 5.0, that would be all over GM's marketing material without any footnotes. In fairness, Acura isn't much better with it's forced restatement of horsepower ratings.

And this with minimal torque steer, as opposed to the ridiculous statement to the effect that a powerful FWD car is "dangerous." Any car is dangerous if an idiot drives it. The SS also has a top end of 154 mph, 1 mph slower than the current M3.

O.K. I get it, that was a hidden joke, right? What "idiot" would even attempt to test the top end of a front wheel drive car at 154 mph? Any idea of what to do when the rear end, with nothing but about 35% of the cars weight holding it down, breaks loose and sends the rolling? Or when a slight vibration in the front combined steering and driving wheels gets amplified and the car loses control? An M3, electronically goverened to 155, would be more stable (and safe) at that speed than ANY front wheel drive car at 125. And many at 100.

Look, I bought a FWD TL 6-speed for it's combination of sportiness, build quality, amenities, etc. It's a very nice car for that purpose. But I'm not kidding myself that I own a serious, high performance sports sedan in the league of a M5, BMW 550i, M3 or even 330i. I know and appreciate the difference in handling, balance, acceleration, control and overall driving dynamics between a FWD and RWD chassis. If you want to embark on the dillusion that there isn't a HUGE difference, that's up to you. But please don't try to confirm Car and Driver's figures without renewing your life insurance policy.

P.S. I wouldn't even dilude myself into thinking a 4-speed slushbox was remotely "sporty" in any car, but there's another forum for that debate.

habitat1

Car and Driver, Motor Trend and Road and Track all tested the 1995 5-speed manual Maxima at 6.5-6.8 seconds 0-60. My 2004 TL 6-speed has been rated at 5.8 to 6.3 by the same magazines. That's about the right difference, based upon my buttmeter. The TL is quicker, but not what you'd expect in going from 190 to 270 (er, 258) horsepower. A lot of that extra FWD power goes into wheel hop and tire spinning. Cool if you are 16. I'm not. (Nor do I drive automatic "non-sport" sedans unless I'm forced to by Hertz or Avis.)

Whether or not you agree with billyperks that excessive power in FWD cars is dangerous, you would have had to have failed your physics class or never really driven a true sports sedan like a 550i to think there isn't a huge difference in driving dynamics.

bodble2

I have no idea what you're referring to. Maybe you got confused and are actually replying to someone else's post? :confuse:

My point simply was that the '95 - '99 gen Maxima automatic had 0-60 times more in the high 7 - mid 8 second range, not the mid 6 second times that early manual versions were able to pull off. Therefore, if the (automatic-equipped) SS was tested at 6 sec., then that would have made it faster than the Max, by a material margin.

Other than that, I couldn't care less what the TL 6-speed was tested at; how sensitive your butt is; whether or not you're 16 or 64; or how often you rent from Avis and Hertz! :surprise:

And no, I have not driven a "true sports sedan" like a 550i (but I never said I did). I guess my loss. But then again, I don't own a "new 911", and my wife is not a lawyer. So I have to be a bit more "frugal".

xrunner2

Look, I bought a FWD TL 6-speed for it's combination of sportiness, build quality, amenities, etc. It's a very nice car for that purpose. But I'm not kidding myself that I own a serious, high performance sports sedan in the league of a M5, BMW 550i, M3 or even 330i. I know and appreciate the difference in handling, balance, acceleration, control and overall driving dynamics between a FWD and RWD chassis.

I have owned some higher-perf rear drivers and have owned front drivers and we currently have an 04 TL in our stable. I would agree that there is absolutely no point in adding any more HP to current TL chasis.

Yes, a well weight balanced rear driver is better at car and driver's "limits". But, how often does a person, even an enthusiast drive at capability limits. At legal speeds, whether on interstate or back roads, and driving sanely at much much less than ten-tenths, the TL is a great performer.

Granted that the expert testers at all car magazines say that BMW 3 feels better subjectively than a front driver like the TL. But, in actual "measured" handling tests at Edmunds and R & T, the TL equals the 3 Series in slalom handling. The TL actually beats the 3 series in slalom by a second+ per Edmunds. Following are comments from Edmunds:

"The TL feels extremely confident on the street, but it took several runs through our slalom to confirm its status as one of the best-handling front-wheel drivers we've sampled. The steering is properly weighted and offers stellar feedback. The engine's broad torque range and progressive throttle response made powering through the slalom easy, and the smart chassis/suspension tuning allowed us to place the car easily between cones. Technically, it may not be as "fun" as a BMW 3 Series, but it obviously goes through the slalom just as rapidly."

Edmunds subjectively rated handling on both the TL and 3 series as "Excellent".

Another issue is driving in snow-belt states. TL has advantage over BMW in ice and snow and would then be better overall choice if one has to contend with this 3-4 months per year.

meateater

TL has advantage over BMW in ice and snow

What's ice and snow?

laurasdada

"What's ice and snow?"

Fabulous for skating and skiing!!! And six or seven months worth of weather in New England...

Snow good. Ice bad.

taxesquire

Hey all, I've had my TL for over a year now, and have consistently changed my oil in accordance with the car's reminder, mainly b/c I understood that it wasn't just milage-based - there is some "sensing" going on in there.

Anyway, my sensor was on for me to change the oil, I'm gonna get it done next week, so I decided to reset the system so it wouldn't display "BS" all the time. I expected it to go away, and then in a few days,l the sensor would notice I still need the oil change, but that hasn't happened. It's been about 4 days now, and I've driven the car at least twice each of those days, but the computer says my oil is at 100%.

Now I'm thinking that maybe this sensor is just based on mileage. Any comments?

ceo3

Welcome to the 2007 Acura MDX and TL
Press Preview Website!

Acura invites you to experience Ahead, by previewing the all new, advanced 2007 Acura MDX, and the exciting and more powerful TL.
Please join us at the 2007 MDX and TL Press Preview to be held in two waves at:

Nemacolin Woodlands Resort in Farmington, PA

Wave 1: July 16 - 19
Wave 2: July 19 - 22

To make your travel arrangements, simply click on the "REGISTRATION" tab and follow the instructions.

We look forward to seeing you in the beautiful rolling hills of southwestern Pennsylvania where you will experience the excitement of Ahead with the 2007 Acura MDX and TL.

bhelsdon

There is nothing in the car that senses what condition the oil is in. The system just counts miles, hours, engine temps and overall driving conditions/styles. Then based on those factors it can approximate how long the oil will last. So since you reset the system, the computer thinks the oil is fresh and is basing your percentage left on fresh oil.

bodble2

Yes, that's what I thought too. The combination of miles, hours, etc, enables the computer to impute average speed, hence driving style, amount of urban driving, etc.

But a thought comes to mind. Wonder what would the computer show if you just drained the oil (without refilling), or similarly, if the oil level is really low, and reset the system?

portoar

I'm buying an '06 TL and I'm not thrilled with the colors either. . . . I don't like the exterior/interior options they've come up with. The '05 had white ext/quartz interior, which was perfect for me, but in the '06 it's either black or parchment, which is pretty but just looks like it will stain and get dirty quickly. I'm going to end up with the silver/quartz combo, it's the best of a bunch of poor choices. I wish they offered the camel with the white exterior.

taxesquire

Yes, I agree that the camel is very striking. I disagree with your comment that black gets dirty more quickly than gray - I think black stays the cleanest-looking fo the longest time with the least upkeep. To me, the only negatives to black is that it gets really hot and makes interior-space look smaller than it really is. This last one might not be a significant issue witht he TL b/c it really is large inside.

I have the camel with the green ext and like it very much.

kdhspyder

The fact is that hybrid cars presently available make no economic sense. Apart from placating a few environmental crackpots and zealots, they are a losing proposition.

...fact (?) is...

False statement ... but you are entitled to make all of them you wish.

You need to do a little more personal research. There is a different forum for that though.

kdhspyder

It is a given than NO car hits its EPA mileage numbers.

Another false statement... Is there a trend here?

Some exceed the EPA values.

priggly

It is a given than NO car hits its EPA mileage numbers.

Another false statement... Is there a trend here?

My statement implied neither that all cars failed to reach their EPA estimates nor that all cars exceeded them. They simply did not hit them.

Yeah, there's a trend here alright. The trend is that you are given to twisting posts around to suit your noticeable tendency to disseminating disinformation.

kdhspyder

I bring to light two of your false statements.... and I'm disseminating misinformation? That's a good one.

What part of your statement below is true?

It is a given than NO car hits its EPA mileage numbers

pat

Let's stop this now. Priggly already explained that statement and there's no reason to carry this on. It's getting too personal.

mikey38

I've had my 06 TL about a month now and have a little over 3k miles on it including a 800 mile round trip this week so I thought I would give my impressions:

Driving...handles great, smooth ride, very responsive, quiet inside with just a bit of wind noise occassionally...nice throaty roar under full throttle. Seats were very comfy on long trips

Mileage - with 100+ degree temps in OK and TX I got just under 32 mpg (hand calculated/trip computer showed 29)at about 75 mph with 4 people on board and a trunk mostly full using 91 Octane gas.

AC - kept us cool and comfy under previously mentioned temps

Nav - it got lost a couple of times (probably uncharted roads) but recovered quickly. Nice feature especially with some of thos unlight street signs within neighborhoods.

Stereo - sounds good but the CD player controls could use some improvements. You should be able to play a CD while loading others and you should be able to shuffle between discs and not just within a single disk. It goes without saying that the TL should have a built in Ipod connection (especially since the TSX has one).

Minor things I'd like to see changed:
-move the parking brake handle to the driver side of the center console
-add a removeable ashtray so I have a place to stick gum rappers and small bits of trash
-get ride of the door locks on the upper door panels...they are right where I rest my elbow when I drive with the window down.

Overall, a great car at a reasonable price. Acura, feel free to contact me for more

animalsrush

I agree with the door locks.. My old Honda had it where the door open handle was. That provides good security when parking in hot sun and you want to roll down windows a bit( even though TL has security system). Als they get in the way..

almin23

anyone has any idea when the 2007 will be out, and how much of a change in the vehicles exterior

bodble2

Interesting that you feel the same way about the parking brake lever as I do. You normally wouldn't think that was a big issue, but it does become important if you have to live with the car day in, day out.

mikey38

I've gotten more used to it in the last month but still end up grabbing my passengers knee by accident. Plus I normally drive with my hand on the brake lever...until now that is.

drat19

Ashtray is a $13.68 (+ shipping) solution here: http://www.handa-accessories.com/tl.html

Sadly, the iPod MusicLink solution is considerably more pricey.

bodble2

"...still end up grabbing my passengers knee by accident."

Me too!! When it's a client sitting next to you (male or female), that's not a good thing.

And I like to fidget with the brake lever when I'm driving too, pressing and playing with release button, etc. I think it's a force of habit like people who like to bit the end of their pens, or chew their fingernails. :sick:

dmarcus48

Agree about the parking brake. Some people on another forum have cut down the door pins. They unscrew and you can cut some off of the bottom to make them shorter. I got some billet aluminum door pins for mine.

Dave

taxesquire

I think it's a force of habit like people who like to bit the end of their pens, or chew their fingernails.

Forget the parking brake - get the 6MT - much more to fidget with and much more fun!!!! :shades:

animalsrush

Wow. I didn't know you could do that. Where did you find the aluminium pins.. Custom made or on internet

jrourke

...Custom made or on internet...

In he forums I read folks were buying the pins and then cutting them down to a smaller size. If I recall correctly, they didn't unscrew from the top however, and required the door panel to be removed