Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
Acura TSX
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Sure, you can compensate for torque steer in a number of ways. That doesn't mean that suspension causes it. The point is that your remarks regarding the Altima and Maxima are a critique of the drivetrain, not the suspension.
The point still stands that bones are only as good as the car they are in. In most cases, bones have far more potential than the car can effectively use.
"I don't disagree with that. But I would love to see how the new ITR stacks up against the old on a track. The new R has more torque, more power and way shorter gearing (actually, the same 6-speed as that used in TSX)." - Robertsmx
And this has something to do with the suspension?
I find it amusing to see people whine about Honda using MacPherson Struts in Civic, in that they decided to go cheap, but it is a non-issue when BMW uses it!
BMW 3-series' ride/handling compromise is 2nd to none. So, is BMW so talented at tuning struts that they find 'bones unnecessary? Since BMW's are no low-budget cars, I'm sure they can afford to include 'bones.
Another "talented" strut tuner is the fwd Mondeo/Focus. A few years ago BMW almost wanted to adopt this platform for it's future entry level car! BMW's excuse was to save development cost. But today we can see that BMW's fwd Mini Cooper got beaten by Focus SVT in both ride and handling, while the strut Civic Si is even worse in steering feel and ride comfort (per CR group comparison). & for the 1st time, the Civic sedan is being call "a loser"(per C&D group comparison)!
Are 'bones necessary? At least for Hondas, I guess. Other Japanese such as Lexus/Infiniti, even w/ 'bones, don't seem to provide "prize-winning" steering feel like the E36 3-series, fwd Alfa Romeo 156, and fwd Mondeo/Focus. Except the 'bone Alfa, rest of them are front-strut cars. Do struts provide better steering feel than 'bones? Those 'bone Civics never had the high level of steering feedback my strut Protege provides. I know that Audi's anti-torque-steer geometry also ruined steering feel especially around straight ahead position.
Like Varmint said, as long as it works...strut or 'bone.
Last night, I found that UK's AutoExpress weekly complained about the 'bone Mazda6's steering feedback! These Europeans cars must have very high standard of steering feel. Especially how the UK's "12 March 2003, AUTOCAR" described the Mondeo's steering as "light" and "brimming with real feel" while Accord's steering "feels encouragingly meatly only to fall short of real feedback, and...immediacy." That's like difference in night & day! That's it, I'm not gonna get the TSX eventhough this near-perfect car only got 1 shortcoming.
Which design is "taking over the (fwd) world"? Take a wild guess! It's the BMW-envied "Focus family" platform - all the way from Mondeo/fwd Jaguar X-Type, to Volvo V30/S40/V50, Audi A3(rear only), VW Golf/Jetta/Passat(rear only), & Mazda3. Pitiful, only the made-in-Japan Japanese engine Mazda3's gonna be reliable, but might not be so quiet.
Nobody can tune a front strut set-up like BMW, and it helps that they're all RWD or AWD, not FWD. (The FWD Mini is a different animal than most other FWD cars, since it was designed to be a handler first, with ride comfort taking a back seat.)
Since BMW builds cars that generally represent the sedan/wagon segements (Z4 and Z8 excluded, of course), it is in their best interest to employ front struts to both maximize interior space and crush zones without significantly increasing the size of the car. Ostensibly, this was Honda's reasoning behind struts in the new Global Small Car platform, but I'm confident that the lower production cost had something to do with it, too.
In the case of BMW (and Porsche, and many other cars, when you get right down to it), the struts work well enough that most of their buyers will never long for wishbones. For those customers, there are other cars. To put it into a "cost" perspective, BMW and Porsche (or anyone else) could build with front wishbones, but they'd have to charge more for 'em, and frankly, cars aren't getting any cheaper, regardless. Wishbones cost more, so if you want to stay in the same price range, something's got to give.
To wit, the Prelude. In its last iteration, it was an expensive car with plain styling and a functional (if spartan) interior. But, thanks to the complicated suspension bits and its stiff structure, it handles like nobody's business, and agruably represents the pinnacle of achievement for finding the ideal ride/handling balance in a FWD car. Throw in ATTS or a LSD, and it's a cornering monster, on par with a 3 Series, if not better in some respects.
And now it's gone. Chalk it up to the high price, the lack of features, and Honda's refusal to continue building a sophisticated car that few people appreciated enough to actually purchase. So, for Honda, the RSX with struts makes sense, since most people would rather get climate control and leather seats instead of wishbones, anyhow.
While I can't blame Honda, or anyone else for going with struts in what are essentially "economy cars," I can lament the fact that Honda has backed away from a feature that offered real benefits and genuine distinction and in a crowded market.
Struts are cheaper, and they do work well enough in most applications. Just don't ever think that you can convice me that they're as good as wishbones, because in a FWD car built to handle like the TSX, they're not.
They might deny it, but I'm sure cost was one of the many reasons why Honda opted to go with a strut design. However, the other reasons (crash safety is my favorite) are all very good reasons for the change. If Honda finds a way to keep the high safety ratings, interior space, etc., AND return to the use of bones... I'm all for it.
First, I think they'd have to develop a coupe-length version of the platform. I've never seen a JDM or UK Accord Coupe, so I assume it doesn't exist, yet. That would be necessary to compensate for the extra weight of a drop top. In this market segment, I think we'd have to assume a power top rather than the less hefty manual designs.
I also expect it would require some chassis stiffening. The shorter wheelbase might help, but the lack of a roof is a big hurdle to get over. There's space for the superfluous drive tunnel that might be exploited toward that end.
Just thinking "out loud".
It's simple as that - geometry angle for tire contact, but what about less friction than the struts? Shouldn't that also help the ride/handling compromise?
Double wishbone is a better setup for ride and handling by default. RWD versus FWD simply does not matter. However, it also brings in some compromises of its own, especially in terms of bulk. Small cars, especially those that are basically designed for regular use on road, not tracks, will benefit more from struts than they would, from double wishbones, to improve crash safety and interior room. This may be one big reason for Honda's move for Civic.
In fact, Odyssey is based on the modified global midsize platform (Accord/TL), but it gives up two things from the base design. Accord/TL have 5-link double wishbone rear (adopted in 1997, replaced the 4-link setup of 1989-97 Accord/Prelude). This is the same rear suspension that Mercedes uses in E and S class. The problem with this setup is its size. It cuts into the cabin and trunk space. To get around it in Odyssey, and the midsize light truck platform in general (Pilot, MDX), the fifth link was dropped. The front suspension, while being double wishbone in Accord/TL, is MacPherson Strut in the light trucks, for the very same reason (room due to it being more compact) and safety (compact and less intrusion).
European compact cars usually have MacPherson Struts front and torsion beam axle/semi-independent rear suspension for a very important reason, small cars more room. Toyota moved to semi-independent rear suspension for Corolla with the redesign, VW etc. use it in its small car offerings (Jetta, Golf etc.). Honda's global economy car platform (Jazz) also utilizes the same setup (which also happens to be the setup on which the CRX and old Civics were based upon). While not the best choice for ride and handling characteristics, they tend to optimize interior room.
I'm sure the design engineers start with the purpose when they get to the drawing boards. And any setup can be made to deliver good enough performance if the basics are good. For Honda's redesigned global compact platform, the choice was to move from double wishbones in the front to MacPherson struts, just like everybody else's competing product, but retaining the 3-link (reactive link) double wishbone setup of the past. Civic, RSX, CRV and Element share this platform.
While I skip Edmunds' review of cars, I decided to take a peek at what they had to say about Civic's redesigned suspension,
"Much ado has been made about Civic's redesigned suspension, with some detractors claiming that Honda had "sold out" by replacing the sophisticated double-wishbone front suspension with the more inexpensive MacPherson strut configuration. We spoke to one of Honda's PR representatives about the matter, and he asserted that the new suspension was rather like a hybrid of a double-wishbone and a MacPherson strut configuration. He maintained that the relocated, high-mounted steering gearbox provides better toe control (the amount that the tires point in toward each other), thereby reducing bump steer and keeping the tires in contact with the road. There's no denying that the redesigned suspension is tuned more for ride comfort than for performance, but it really isn't noticeable under most driving conditions. We have heard, however, that struts make it harder to lower a vehicle. But unless you're a street-racer who plans to make that kind of modification to your Civic, we don't see what the big whoop is."
Getting back to TSX, it uses double wishbone front and 5-link (Watt Link) double wishbone rear, the same setup that American Accord and Acura TL/CL use. The difference is in the tuning with a more aggressive steering wheel tuning (Honda's practice in tuning steering setup can vary from car to car, even in Europe or Japan, they may have three different types of steering setup). TSX could have benefited, in terms of cabin size, from use of struts or a more compact suspension design, especially since it is about 6 inch shorter than the American Accord (and 2 inch narrower). But it shares the platform designed for the next TL as well, so the compromise of giving up some space for chassis improvement was adopted.
Are 'bones necessary? At least for Hondas, I guess.
Why? While I would prefer double wishbones given my experience, but I see why Honda should and others may not. Steering feedback etc. does not necessary depend on double wishbone versus MacPherson Strut versus XYZ setup. It is about setting up the steering itself, and how the engineers want to design it, its gearing and all.
This does not happen just with the steering wheel, just about every important element in a car has some compromise built into it. Take TSX for example. The DBW throttle system is deliberately detuned to be less aggressive at low engine speed and partial throttle to prevent wheel spin and provide more control to the driver. OTOH, some automakers may choose to keep that sensitivity on to provide the feel of 'instant response'. In my Accord, the steering wheel is not as sharp at parking lot speeds as it is at 80 mph. OTOH, some cars provide sharpness at low speeds, but lose the same as speed goes up.
Nobody can tune a front strut set-up like BMW, and it helps that they're all RWD or AWD, not FWD.
Okay. But, would double wishbone be a better setup for BMW to play with? Or is it that they can't make their cars better by adopting a more expensive setup? Or is it that RWD doesn't bring out the advantages of double wishbone setup and the disadvantages of MacPherson Struts. Comments awaited.
The FWD Mini is a different animal than most other FWD cars, since it was designed to be a handler first, with ride comfort taking a back seat.
Interesting perspective. Here is my take on it. When a platform is (re)designed, the possible trims/models that will use it are already accounted for. If not, I would call it a terrible practice. Do you think the platform that TSX uses was designed for use in TL? Or does it just happen that suddenly a decision is made to modify it for another use?
It does not matter which model or setup (comfort, touring or sport) arrives first. The platform is likely designed to handle all of them. When Civic DX was launched, the platform it used was also meant to be used by Civic Type-R and Integra Type-R. The key here is tuning, the purpose.
Since BMW builds cars that generally represent the sedan/wagon segements (Z4 and Z8 excluded, of course), it is in their best interest to employ front struts to both maximize interior space and crush zones without significantly increasing the size of the car. Ostensibly, this was Honda's reasoning behind struts in the new Global Small Car platform, but I'm confident that the lower production cost had something to do with it, too.
Do you think BMW likes to ignore the importance of lower production cost? If MacPherson Struts is cheap for Honda, it is cheap for BMW as well. Period.
In the case of BMW (and Porsche, and many other cars, when you get right down to it), the struts work well enough that most of their buyers will never long for wishbones.
And so it does in a Civic. But I bet you will agree that all of them will benefit from double wishbone. Would they not?
To put it into a "cost" perspective, BMW and Porsche (or anyone else) could build with front wishbones, but they'd have to charge more for 'em, and frankly, cars aren't getting any cheaper, regardless. Wishbones cost more, so if you want to stay in the same price range, something's got to give.
And Honda shouldn't care about the cost perspective?
To wit, the Prelude. In its last iteration, it was an expensive car with plain styling and a functional (if spartan) interior. But, thanks to the complicated suspension bits and its stiff structure, it handles like nobody's business, and agruably represents the pinnacle of achievement for finding the ideal ride/handling balance in a FWD car. Throw in ATTS or a LSD, and it's a cornering monster, on par with a 3 Series, if not better in some respects.
Prelude used Accord platform. I can bet the new ITR is no slouch either, although it uses MacPherson struts, and LSD, of course.
Chalk it up to the high price, the lack of features, and Honda's refusal to continue building a sophisticated car that few people appreciated enough to actually purchase.
TSX = features + sophistication + reasonable price.
Where have you been? Or do you expect $25K Prelude setup in a $15K Civic?
So, for Honda, the RSX with struts makes sense, since most people would rather get climate control and leather seats instead of wishbones, anyhow.
As much as it does in a BMW! Except that leather is still an option!
While I can't blame Honda, or anyone else for going with struts in what are essentially "economy cars," I can lament the fact that Honda has backed away from a feature that offered real benefits and genuine distinction and in a crowded market.
Which benefits? My 2000 Civic has double wishbones, but I will take RSX over it for handling, anyday.
Struts are cheaper, and they do work well enough in most applications. Just don't ever think that you can convice me that they're as good as wishbones, because in a FWD car built to handle like the TSX, they're not.
FYI, TSX uses double wishbones! The rest, good point.
It shows, to me, the priorities and sacrifices of the platform.
The "Accord price" Jetta got long travel & good quietness in a small car that doesn't even got the rear leg room of a 'bone Civic sedan, & will sell even more if it's reliable. People like me are willing to spend Accord price(but not BMW price) for a premium small car w/ 'bone-Civic-like convenient 32.8ft turning circle. I'm sure there's market for the 'bone Civic and Prelude in the Acura show rooms. Today's Acura 1.7EL(Civic twin in Canada) don't got no bones. Shame on you! Too bad the latest Preludes' long headlights killed it. Even the ones on that Pontiac Sunbird are less ugly.
These days, inexpensive cars can be good enough. That's why the Euro-steering/suspension Japanese car - Mazda3 - is the way to go! I wouldn't sacrifice the excellent steering feedback & get the quieter TSX, although I'm willing to spend as much as $2k to make the Mazda3 quiet!
Prelude was a completely independent platform and was not built off of Honda's Global mid-size platform, even though there were suspension design similarities between the Accord and the Prelude. All the more reason why Honda could not retain it, in addition to the slow sales at that price point.
Later...AH
must be another car you have actually driven and therefore know all about its steering. by the way, when does the mazda3 come out?
As I quoted from March 12 AUTOCAR, another Focus-family vehicle - Mondeo(II) - has "light" steering "but superbly accurate and brimming w/ real feel. It make it easier to drive quickly."! & (Euro)Accord's steering, despite having firmer suspension bushings than TSX's to help the steering feel, while "feels encouragingly meaty, only to fall short of real feedback, and...immediacy"! No, I haven't driven the Mondeo or the Focus SVT, but that was enough to convince me that the highest Euro (steering) std is still miles ahead. Forgive me for being such a "traitor" that got so much faith in an inexpensive European car, but I still believe that Japanese hasn't caught up w/ Europe's best steering-feel/ride-comfort compromise. & don't be surprised to find Mazda's 3 rides better than 6. The '90 long-travel-suspension Protege rides better than 626 back then!
I just feel fortunate that a reliable Japanese compact riding on Europe's best fwd steering/suspension set up is finally available. & this Mazda3 is based on the improved Focus II. Of course, I can't wait to test drive it side by side w/ the TSX, which cost more mainly for it's Acura badge, larger size, and extra equipments. It's quietness is probably the only feature I'd envy. Since I'm a stick driver, Mazda's clumsier auto tranny doesn't apply.
As someone mentioned that VW's space-saving trailing-arm rear suspension is semi-ind. It actually works like a fully-ind unit w/ a sway bar connected. I think it's very "independent", since the camber of 1 wheel is not affected by the other wheel hitting a bump.
The (fwd-Audi derived)Dasher & mid-'90's Maxima/Sentra are truely non-ind. Did fwd Audi switch to "ind" since the '96 A4? What about the new Corolla? Does its camber get tilted by the other side's travel?
I'm not sure if it's still happening, but the calm comfortable frequency found in Nissan and Mitsubishi shock absorbers sure didn't come in the '90 Mazda Protege LX I purchased. In fact the selected frequency in my moderate-rate struts was so wrong that the car bounced even higher than the amplitude of the bumps! As evident when I tried to drink from a 12oz-can Coke, the drink kept being agitated out all over me as I cruised down on So Cal's concrete fwys. My "comparison test" concluded that the cheap Gabriel replacement struts were the cure for the wrong frequency & turned this long-travel suspension into a cuddling relaxing cushion. At least it was steady-enough for sub-fwy speed, & still OK at higher speed if slightly floaty.
Other than these, Mazda's great. It's just the even-better-dynamic Euro-steering/suspension Mazda3 might be too good still to be called Mazda. So som'in like "Amati" is probably more appropriate!
From the "Volvo future vehicle" thread, I found out that the Mazda3 twin, S40/V50, is even roomier than S60. Is the TSX roomier than S60?
Frankly, I do think the Mazda3 is even roomy enough to seriously compete w/ the TSX. ;-) Amazing isn't it? Let's wait & see...
this is some mighty economy car indeed.
Camry was the only one w/ sufficient leg room for me to stretch out front and back, nearly as good as the current Mazda6, but it's also the only one w/ slight tightness in rear head room.
The Accord(just newly re-designed w/ new platform) got the most head room. & even though there was tons of knee room in the back, I couldn't even stretch out my legs forward as much as in the compact Protege! So all the Accord's extra head room for much taller people is almost pointless! In fact, up to '97, Accord's rear leg room was so horrible, even trailing behind the double-wishbone Civic sedans!
Of course the Protege, being an economy car, got the lowest-height & flattest rear-seat cushion for comfort, along w/ a fairly flat rear seat back.
Flat rear-seat back & cushion near the doors is actually less uncomfortable for 3 to sit across. The Legend's back seat, even though a little low, at least did pretty well for the 3-passenger squeeze.
The TSX's 3" shorter-than-Accord wheelbase is likely to lose only about 3" of room to stretch out your legs. But the new Accord already got so much leg room anyway, significantly more than the 103in-wheelbase(but big) '92-96 Camry which got more stretch-out leg room than the original LS400! I find it hard to believe that TSX is only slightly roomier than the Audi A4. & less roomy than Protege/Civic? Was that just some misleading EPA total added numbers including the useless extra head room?
You can always take out the rear seat cushion to gain more head room, & hence the total volume, too. But that would make the stretch-out leg room much worse & you'd have to sit w/o thigh support & hang your knees by your ears. Protege & Civic's rear seat cushion heights are still a little low to be truely comfortable. You need tall compacts like the newly designed Corolla, Focus & Mazda3/Volvo V50, although well-shaped seats are also needed in order to be comfortable.
Come on, we all know that this Acura is just a loaded more-sporty-&-compact Accord built in Japan. Maybe only "very few people" are knowledgeable like us, but many of us know that, even w/o the Euro-designed platform, Mazda is the closest thing to European driving feel a reliable car can offer!
& if even "fewer" people will compare the domestic-built Mazda6 with the elegantly-made TSX, then the only Euro-platform-dynamic made-in-Japan sport sedan - the 103in-wheelbase Mazda3(although the name sounds misleadingly cheap almost like a Tercel or a half-price Mazda6) - w/ classy A4-like dashboard styling and a 1st-class-comfort seating height(rare for a sport sedan) might as well make the TSX look like nothing special. The TSX even look like a fool when trying to disguise the original Accord dashboard by changing the sharp-looking center pot into something not just dull looking but also harder for people to spot that useful center switch. I'm sure the good-taste Europeans wouldn't bother w/ this TSX interior "upgrade".
W/ the exception of less quietness & possibly less-comfortable seats & lack of ventilation air purifier, I don't see the Mazda3 lagging behind the TSX in any way.
The TSX, however, lacks the excellent steering feedback the Mazda3's Euro-platform most likely offers. This means losing the pleasure of driver involvement especially during hard driving!
As long as the cars got nearly-equivalent achievements, they are comparable. In the late '80's, the fwd V6 "Toyota" Camry may be roomy and quiet enough to compare to the much-more-expensive fwd V6 "Acura" Legend, but the ride and handling are both way behind. The Mazda3, though, is different - It's got the dynamic & comfort to boot!
This is a fun debate 'cause I'm trying to challenge a much-more-expensive Japanese-technology nearly-perfect car w/ a Japanese economy car "cheated" w/ the "BMW-envied fwd Euro-platform". ;-)
If you're talking about the snob appeal of the Acura-badge, then that's a different story. But so many of those premium-brand cars are total jokes!
The Acura Integra sport sedan is just too noisy - it's no Beemer. Believe me, a sport sedan needn't be this loud inside the car, unless you wear helmet all the time.
The short-suspension-travel Lexus ES300 from the 20th century, even though quiet, can't even soak up big bumps as well as an inexpensive Euro-designed VW Jetta compact!
Some cars can't do handling, & some cars can't do ride comfort. But the Maxima twin - Infiniti I30 -, again another premium sedan w/o long suspension travel, can't do either! This is especially true prior to '99, even if you're willing to sacrifice the ride comfort even more to get the slightly-better-handling I30t.
& even the feel-laden steering, introduced in '97 for the Maxima SE, was rated less precise than even Chevy Malibu's(or the Olds equivalent's, I forgot which one. per MT's 3-car comparison test).
Road noise isolation & mightly premium-gas power are about the only Nissan's forte.
Lexus IS300, almost a substitute for the best driver's sedan - E36 3-series -, turned out to be ragged at the limit plus all the complains from C&D such as insufficient steering feedback and easily-used-up suspension travel, let alone the composure, which Automobile complained, too. Neither is this Lexus a quiet car.
& the Infiniti G35, which might seem to have more steering feel than the E46(not the better E36) 3-series. C&D criticized its steering as unaturally tuned & need some driver's corrections, plus bad fishtail along w/ disappointing quietness and harsh ride. I do find the optional rear premium seat's headrests amazingly comfortable, though, - definitely better than the joke of high headrests under the low roof in the ES300.
"snob appeal" brands don't appeal to me. I'll rather put the extra $ into my pocket. No, I don't feel embarrassed when chicks see me driving in a Mazda
Can Acura really be considered a "luxury brand?" I think of it as more of a near-lux brand. Given the current offerings, it would seem that Acura is comfortable in this middle ground, as are its buyers.
In terms of market perception, Acura certainly doesn't have the same draw as the names Lexus, BMW, or Mercedes Benz. But it does better than Infinity and ranks much higher than most American near-luxury brands.
Boston is fertile ground for compact sedans, because of its narrow streets and non-existent parking space, no monster SUV's around here! Passats/Jettas are more numerous than probably anywhere else in US. So where are all the 6's? I haven't seen one yet in Boston, months after its debut.
I say this with dismay, because Mazda is building excellent cars and deserves a wide audience. Right now does it have any?
I went back to the Minneapolis Auto Show this last week and looked much more closely at the TSX. It really looks much smaller than the Accord. One car that really impressed me was the new Maxima.
In the 90's (and even today), the Jetta was hugely popular with the college crowd here in the Northeast. Those buyers have grown and the Passat has become the logical step up. Ditto with the Civic and Accord, though for a somewhat different set of buyers. Mazda lacks that "step up". IMHO, the Protege is currently good enough to be that car, but it hasn't been held in high regard for long enough. Maybe the next generation will find Mazda.
The large number of colleges plays a noticeable part in the culture. New Englanders tend to go for performance/looks in cars! Passats, A4s & Altimas are very popular. Altimas certainly seem to outnumber Camrys. But there aren't many super fancy cars partly because most cars (upwards of 90% is my guess) have no indoor garages at night.
You'd think 6 find an ideal place here. But I don't see any Protege either. It might be Mazda has non-existent dealership presence in this area. Mazda/Ford management is just so inept, reminds me of Nissan a few years back.
i knew the tsx was less roomy that the accord but i thought it was roomier than a civic/protege.
TSX is about the size of 94-97 Accord and current Passat. Overall EPA cabin volume is about 91 cu ft compared to 92 cu. Ft for Civic LX. However, this is a bit misleading since TSX will come with moonroof which can account for a loss of about 4 cu ft (Civic EX has moon roof and interior volume is about 88 cu. ft; Accord DX/LX/LXV6 have interior volume of about 103 cu. ft but only 98 cu. ft for Accord EX/EXV6 also because of moon roof).
Keeping it on topic - I eagerly await arrival of the TSX. I was very interested in a TL until this was announced.
Varmint - a few Pilots were stockpiled at the RT 44 dealer before intro. I wonder where the TSX's will be? Maybe at the Westborough depot?
So Californians can be a little superficial. Instead of looking into Protege's true talents, they only find Civic's or even Corolla's nice or flashy looks appealing. Or they just like to follow whatever the trendy crowds do. To be fair, the Protege is a little too noisy on the fwy.
When the Protege was 1st introduced in '90, C&D, after realizing that this high-strung-handling 4-dr is "a wolf in the sheep skin", said, "Who wants a sport sedan that looks so dull, or a sedate-looking sedan that rides so hard?" C&D later also found out that college kids find the flashy-looking (1st generation)Saturn SL sedan attractive. Even today, the Protege still looks the same. So college kids in Boston... I think, in a way, this conservative looks is good, 'cause a wild driver like me don't want cops' attention!
Well, Mazda6's enormous-size turning circle, perhaps even larger than the bigger Accord's, is a no no in Boston. The sleek-looking Mazda6 isn't small. It's roomy and even longer than the TSX outside.
The Jetta(IV) doesn't got small turning circle, either. & neither does the Mini Cooper.
So, most likely the new "un-nerd handling"-&-"Euro-riding" Mazda3 isn't just short & roomy, but likely to have a smaller turning circle, too. & don't worry, this (new)Corolla-shaped Mazda3 should look way hot compare to the Corolla, Civic, & Protege. More like a Jetta.
During the early '90's, I sampled 4 Mazda dealers in So CA, 50% of them were excellent, the other 50% were jerks. The Mazda headquarter was nice enough to take care of my rattling gauge screw by sending an engineer to one of those nice dealers to investigate my case. Only a reliable-car company can possibly afford to serve one owner for the whole day!
Since I bought a Mazda in '90, they already got 3-yr/50,000mi bumper-to-bumper warranty! & can be extended to 10,000mi btb plus free loaner car during repairs for only $600 more!
The "4-yr/50,000mi btb & free 3-yr maintenance" BMW charges $500-more just for the 4th yr free maintenance. This yr, that $500-deal is included in the MSRP. So now both BMW & Mercedes carry the same coverage. No wonder Mercedes' MSRP is so high, especially when CR rated its reliability even worse then Beemer's.
I don't expect to spend anywhere close to $500 on my Mazda's 4th yr maintenance.
Also, how a car communicates with the driver is more about feel, and more often than not, magazine reviews aren't the best place to draw conclusions. Besides, there are just too many factors that make a car good, better or best. That said, there is no point using this thread for M3 discussion. It will not compete with TSX. M6, would.
In terms of dimensions, TSX is about 9 inch shorter than Altima, 6 inch shorter than Accord sedan, 4 inch shorter than M6 and 2 inch shorter than Passat but 4 inch longer than A4.
By the way, any one knows the turning circle dimension (curb to curb) of the TSX?
I've had long wheel base cars with tight turning circles and short wheel base cars with large turning circles, the opposite of what one would expect.
The width of tires and wheels as well as steering geometry, taking into account fender and suspension clearance are major factors determining turning radius.
A PT Cruiser is a good example. The cars with the standard 15 wheels have a 36 foot turning circle. The cars with the touring package 16 inch wheels have a 40 foot turning circle. The PT Turbo, with 17 inch wheels takes almost 43 feet. In each case the wider wheels and tires result in a larger turning circle.
The steering gear is the same, but degrees of wheel turn is reduced, apparently to maintain clearance when wider tires and larger wheels are installed.
The TSX may have a wider tire/wheel than the Accord and different steering geometry in addition to having different fenders, any of which can result in a larger turning circle.
For many, I suspect the lack of a V6, not the lack of a tight turning radius, will be a major factor in the purchase decision.