By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
S2000: put Rick's Voodoo Chrome shift ball ( in effect lowers the shifter about 1 inch, becuase it screws down lower with top of shift knob almost at top of shift ball), very short shift length, even smoother than EX shifter, fairly short clutch take-up.
TL- 6 speed drove some time back, but as I remember it was smooth shifting similar to EX.
Cheers,
MidCow
P.S. any of the 3 choices are execllent!
P.S.S - Onl;y get about 23 mpg with S200 beucase the sound of Invidia exhuast, top-down, engine and shifter make you really smile when you drive sporty
Driving dynamics are very similar: slight difference in shift linkage as noted in earlier posts - but both handle (steering, cornering, braking) and accelerate almost identically. Lower beltline and larger rear window give the Accord an edge in driver visibility.
Features:
Accord has (noticeably) more rear legroom - seat designs are very similar (TL memory is nice, both are firm and supportive). TL sound system is better, but Premium 180 Watt model in Accord was sufficient for me (3 month subscription to XM is nice, too). Bluetooth is a nice differentiating feature for the TL.
Aesthetics:
Even with the 06 Accord redesign, the TL definitely has the edge in terms of panel design. I actually prefer, however, the Accord Wheels that are exclusive to the 6MT (pulled straight from the parts bin for the '03 CL Type S). The gap is very narrow with regard to interior "bling" and materials quality, but I found differing approaches for tan interiors (preferred color scheme): The Accord EX 6MT goes the "sport" route with Carbon Fiber Look trim and real leather door liner/armrest - while Acura goes luxo with nicely contrasting faux wood trim and chrome.
Bottom Line:
I leased - so the money factor and associated depreciation made for a huge difference in monthly expense ($287.50 vs. $416.25 w/ no cap cost reduction). I could afford either - but couldn't personally justify the value differential - and ended up going with the Accord. Either way you go, you won't be disappointed; these are both world class vehicles with impeccable fit & finish.
The extra $ buys more horsepower and torque, better brakes, low profile tires, SportShift, front passenger power seat, Hand Free Link for bluetooth, HID headlamps, a better warranty,free roadside assistance, rear windows that roll all the way down, the best crash test data, etc etc....
And did I mention better styling?
BTW: Supply of this model is good in Northern NJ...
I could see people justifying the extra expense of the Acura, but for my money, the TL was never in the running. The way I see it, you get minor improvements in handling and braking (Car and Driver actually tested the Accord as being a tad quicker in acceleration), and you don't have to see yourself driving around nearly as often. But for me, the Accord hit the "sweet spot" in terms of power, performance, and price: I paid $25300, or about $7800 less than the TLs MSRP.
If the difference were 2-4 thousand, I might have taken a longer look, but eight grand is another matter entirely. I can get one heck of a set of performance tires that will likely erase most of the handling differences and still have seven thousand left over. Styling was not a major issue with me; in fact, the better the car blends in with the rest of the sheep, the less likely I am to get attention from John Law when I'm barreling down the 101 at 80+.
When I took the on-ramp at a similar speed in my Accord, I first noticed the bump did unsettle the car nearly as much, but as I attempted to initiate the same "slide" I got in the Focus, the power shut down for a second or two. It just wouldn't let me open the throttle with the suspension loaded the way it was.
Of course, all one has to do is flip the switch to "Off", and the problem is solved one hundred percent.
I realize styling is subjective, but to me, the TL's styling is worth 2G, minimum.
'21 Dark Blue/Black Audi A7 PHEV (mine); '22 White/Beige BMW X3 (hers); '20 Estoril Blue/Oyster BMW M240xi 'Vert (Ours, read: hers in 'vert weather; mine during Nor'easters...)
.....eight grand buys:(in descending cost order).........
1. a lot Crown Royal..........
2. even more Canadian Mist....
3. still more 87 octane (which the TL officially eschews)
.......however: de guispitus nondesputandem .....
..ez..
I'm only getting 20 mpg. Factors are:
-only has 500 miles on it.(still in the breakin period)
-Most of my driving is city driving, and i'm also not babying it.
It's rated at 20 mpg in the city. so i guess i shouldn't complain.
On a side note- If had more responsibilities, I agree with ezshift, I would not spend the extra 8k on a car. But i'm young and fortunate (or stupid) enough to have the TL.
However, the TL is one of the best looking cars around. To me the Accord is just plain ol' UGLY, from the windshield forward. I hope Honda seriously re-styles the Accord. If there were, only, a 2K difference in the price of a TL compared to an Accord - TL wins in the blink of an eye.
I've always liked the Accords, but there is no way I'll buy one as long as they look the way they do.
Also - what about more hp and torque, SportShift transmission, power passenger seat, performance tires, free roadside assistance, back seat windows that roll all the way down, ....
And yea - the styling is killer.
And yea - the styling is killer.
The only thing I'd pay for is the roadside assistance. As far as the hp/torque goes, the Accord has more than enough, and torque steer exists in the TL (experienced firsthand).
Performance tires cost more to replace, and typically have much less treadwear due to softer rubber. Sportshift? I'll take a manual if I want to shift my own. Backseat windows that roll all the way down? Ok, that REEEEALLLY doesn't matter to me at ALL.
The styling IS killer, though.
I guess I'm too pracitcal (read: cheap) to own a TL. Oh well, there'a reason Accords sell well, too!
Moreover, the Accord does not have oversteer like the Acura.
Torque can be changed for $159.00 by installing a better crank pully. You can get your windows to roll down with a new $20 relay inside the rear doors.
Bluetooth and memory seats are the only options on the TL that are not easily installed. I can live without those.
Labor for all is approx. $344 - four hours at $86.00/hour -if you do not do the work yourself.
Performance tires are $600.00 installed and balanced for the best-of-breed lower-profile Michelin Pilot Sport A/S. These are far better than the tires on the current TL.
Forget the fake wood..it does nothing for me after owning a Jaguar with real wood. Wood kits cost less then $300 anyway.
I could easily afford either car and opted for the Accord. Am in the process of upgraded the tires, intake, exhaust, crank pully, speakers, Brembo brakes and HID lights. The total bill is $2,700 with labor and without voiding the warranty. Compare that to a $7,800 sticker price difference. So, I am driving an ugly car without bluetooth and a memory seat for approximately $5,100 less? And...I have more legroom?
Granted, Acura will give a 2.9% interest rate to those who finance against the Honda 5.9%.
Now, I LOVE the Acura Styling and think the Honda has a "blah" exterior, but $5,100 invested over five years should yield a nice down payment for the next mid-life crisis exotic car purchase. I do not need my car to pick-up women or keep pace with my neighbors who are up to their eyeballs in debt. If that were the case, I would buy another Jaguar or Porche and park one mile from everyone else to avoid door dings.
Just my two cents. If you are reading the posts and are considering a purchase, both cars are solid, well-built and have a high residual value so you really cannot go wrong. That's good news to me!
Not too many unhappy people on the Honda/Acura boards?
Great for Honda...good for us, lol.
Nor the TL. Neat trick if you could though :P
Have you driven a TL? with FWD and 60% +/- weight over the front wheels, how did you get this car to oversteer? In my experience, the TL definitely is in the understeer category.
Did you pull the handbrake during maneuvers or something similar to engage an oversteer-like maneuver or more likely power slide?
I cannot understand why your experience in a TL resulting in a conclusion that it oversteers.
- to some people driving an "ugly" car can be worth the extra $$ ( I personally don't think the Accord is ugly)
- as well as having memory seats where a car is used by more than one person
"Now, I LOVE the Acura Styling and think the Honda has a "blah" exterior"
- umm, :confuse: To some, styling alone can justify extra $$.
"Granted, Acura will give a 2.9% interest rate to those who finance against the Honda 5.9%."
- the difference in interest rates means a lot in terms of monthly payments.
Now, by adding in the sportier suspension- could the extra $$ make up for the differences- sure- for some, not all.
Either way, both vehicles are winners.
Honda is very focused on getting exemplary gas mileage and created an ACCORD that is very slippery in the air...and it is not hostile to pedestrians. Good work Honda.
Yes - Sportshift is a must brother. Once you have it you'll never want to give it up. Shoot - even a Sonata has it.
Saw a Ferrari 360(?)Spider in the parking lot Friday. It had paddle shifters. Now that can't be good. Right? What's Ferrari thinking?
Accord sales are falling vs. last year according to hondanews.com BTW
The Ferrari originally perfected the paddle shifters (F1 - style).
No real surprise that Accord sales are slipping now that a new Camry is out and Honda hasn't done much in the way of special offers to hold sales until the 2008 arrives. They were actually number 1 last year if you take away Camry's 14 percent fleet sales. Looks like its coming back off its pedastal (they trade places pretty often, like in 2001-2002).
I think the Accord EX V6 has the same suspension as the TL? At least that's what some Acura mechanics told me? They also said the drive train is the exact same with no tweaks.
Honda owners can bring their Accord to some Acura dealerships for service. They do not advertise this widely, but many of the parts are the same. What I really miss are Brembo brakes. The Accord has lousy brakes compared to the TL. That will be the last mod. to my new Accord.
I sense that your opinions are derived as much or more from what you hear (I think the Accord EX V6 has the same suspension as the TL? At least that's what some Acura mechanics told me?) as from what you experience...
Who wants to shift a 4 door sedan anyway? A TL isn't a Vette or a Cayman. Its an executive cruiser. The Sportshift gives you the option of playing around with your car when you want, but doesn't strap you with having to shift gears when you don't want to (like 98% of the time).
You'll see a Sportshift in the redesigned Accord - guaranteed.
Still doesn't make it any more useful. It just happens to be the flavour of the month.
As for a moonroof. Well...let's see what use I can make of it. Cool off the interior? Nah. It actually does the reverse...heats up the interior by letting the sun in. Makes my air-cond works overtime. :mad: Open-air motoring? Opening is too small for that.
ME!!
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
The Sportshift is a novelty, but I love mine. And with the Accord being the only car in its class without one, yea, you'll see one in the redesigned model. I agree.
And a 6spd in a sedan? Why?
Well I've had 5 sedans over the last 30 years, 4 of which, including the current, had manual transmissions, and my reasons are:
I feel like I have more control.
I can get more performance out of somewhat underpowered 4 cylinder engines.
Better gas mileage.
And now, at my advanced age, driving a manual makes me feel not quite so grown up.
That's why I'm looking at an Accord EXL with 5sp. I wish Honda offered a 6 speed on the 4 cylinder.
In some areas of SoCal a moonroof is almost a necessity to keep the interior from burning. Sure you could crack the windows, but that make theft of interior contents easier (in the GTA capitol). Most moonroofs I've seen have a sliding cover to limit how much sun you want coming in. So just pop it up and adjust the slider. Keeps my TL from going to 120+ temps in this CA sun.
Plus taking a drive at night out in the desert and seeing all the stars - if that's not worth $1k I don't know what is.
2 Fords with moonroofs and not neither one leaked even after 8 years ownership on both.
I finished driving a 2006 Hybrid accord and then drove the 2006 Acura TL. The engine on the Hybrid wasn't much different than the TL although the system made it feel like the breaks were slipping when at a complete stop. I may have been doing something wrong since I've just took it for a test drive and have no hybrid experience. I really liked the look and the feel of the Acura.
I want the luxury of the 2006 TL but there were 3 deal breakers that will force me to wait while I check out the lexus offerings.
The gas mileage on the 2006 isn't much different from my 2001 TL - I will not buy a car unless it is at least 20% better on gas. I wish there was a HYBRID TL with MUCH better gas mileage. Let's face it - gas prices are not EVER going to get to a "reasonable price" again. I won't be surprised if it is up to $4 per gallon in 2 years. But it isn't just about the money - I won't save money by going hybrid - it is about the resources and time.
The noise level of the 2006 is slighly better than my 2001 but it doesn't even compete with a nice Toyota in my opinion. They REALLY REALLY need to improve the sound since I spend a great deal of time in my car on my BT headset.
The navigation system is behind the curve. I want to be able to say 1200 Main Street, anytown, anystate and have it pull up the address. The accord nav is closer to this than the 2006 TL and the newest nav units can do this pretty well so it should be replaced in 2007.
(1) Gas mileage: The current generation TL isn't great on gas, but reasonable for a car of its performance. I average only 16-17 in city/mixed driving, but 28-30+ on the highway. On the other hand, compared to your 2001 TL, the current TL is considerably quicker, at least when I compare my 6-speed to any previous TL or TL-S model. If the 20%+ better performance isn't important to you, and you would rather have 20% better mileage, you need to shop for a less powerful car.
(2) I spend a great deal of time in my car on my BT headset.(??) I assume you mean you WOULD be spending a great deal of time on the bluetooth phone system that comes integrated into the TL? I have never had an issue with road noise interfering with phone conversations and the standard bluetooth phone system in the TL is as good as any on the market. Again, however, you should consider that the TL, especially the 6-speed, is more oriented towards precise handling than road isolation.
(3) Nav system - Again, the nav system in my 2004 TL (and our 2005 MDX) are extremely functional, accurate and easy to use. Far better than the navigation system in our new Porsche 911. I would hardly make a choice of car based upon which one allowed you to speak an address into the system. Within 2-3 years any system today will be "behind the curve" in frivolous features, but the good ones (like the TL) will still be highly functional. If you are a slave to electronic gadgetry, make sure you opt for a 24 month lease on whatever you get and be prepared to pay the price.
Perhaps a Toyota/Lexus is a better choice for you if the performance orientation of the TL isn't a priority. Their engineers seem to use Buick as the model of driving dynamics, which is a non starter for me. But they are very reliable and aesthetically attractive cars.
We're talking Toyota, right? Reliable? Probably. Aesthetically attractive? Hmmm....