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
Keep in mind that the MSRP will only last as long as folks are willing to pay it, after which it'll be the same old 2-3% over invoice game. I'd bet you could get a TSX w/o Nav for $25K once the smoke clears.
I really would love Acura to ditch the fake-plastic-wood crap from their cars and retire the plastic-wood to the Honda end of the business. But, looking at my crystal ball again, this is not going to happen !!
Later...AH
I'm sure a lot of people will find their Accord LX V6 a bargain & no longer mind about its "ugly butt" once seeing the TSX's pricing. Most people don't push the envelope like I do, so they don't mind lacking the stability to save their [non-permissible content removed] when taking too much chances.
& later, if... Factory LSD would be nice. I can't afford to install one afterwards. Some cars don't even got a good-designed factory LSD! The turbo Mazdaspeed Protege's LSD is a pain in the butt(per April '03 Automobile).
As for wood versus faux wood, I don't mind either as long as it doesn't add to the cost, and looks good. It is only about giving an accent to the interior, instead of being able to smell it.
"(Accord) Mondeo-matching dynamics tainted by poor town ride" "After many close-fought contests, the Mondeo's dynamics are still a force to be reckoned with. The Mazda 6 may equal its composure at speed and the Renault Laguna may better its ride over poor surfaces, but overall none can match the Ford's broad repertoire. Nor does the Accord, but its range of abilities come so close to the Ford's that it claims an easy second, putting it ahead of new faces like the Mazda and Toyota(Avensis)."
Here's the ride of the Mondeo, "Better to drive the than any rival, and with a helm to shame many supposed sports car, although the ride can be knobbly."
& the Accord, "Step out of a Laguna or Mondeo into the Accord after driving along pock-marked city roads and you'll notice how much better both those cars ride. While Honda always retains its suppleness, its low-speed ride over broken surfaces is its chassis' weakest feature. However, it improves as your speed increases and is fluid and Mondeo-comfortable at all other times." "Knobby ride in town becomes smoother at speed; body control simply outstanding on twisty A-roads"
The TSX's suspension is at least as firm (i.e., 5% firmer rate but softer bushings & roll bars), but having bad ride ONLY at low speed means good damping & doesn't show any signs of lack of suspension travel.
"(Accord's steering) lacks the confidence of the Mondeo's system off the straight-ahead, but it's just as precise and communicative in other respects, doing a good job of filtering out mid-corner road acne." Not bad here, considering how C&D complained about the TSX's steering numbness in sensing the tire adhesion.
No comments found here about the Mazda6's steering.
p.117 "(Mazda 6)...find ride and handling, but not as good a motorway cruiser as the Mondeo."
As I remember it was not offered for many years.
Question for discussion - what is to prevent the TSX from meeting the fate of the Vigor?
So if the TSX becomes the TL it ought to be pretty successful.
As for the Type S, I think that is a possibility. Sometimes the Type S model is launched immediately (RSX-S CL-S), while other times they wait. It is the sort of change that Honda/Acura makes when the car reaches mid-life.
Vigor evolved into 2.5TL and 3.2TL. The major difference was 2.5 liter I-5 (170 HP?) used in Vigor/2.5TL, and 3.2 liter V6 (210 HP) used in 3.2TL. There were some cosmetic differences between the two trims of TL (grill).
Beginning MY1999, Honda dropped the I-5 engine, replacing it with J25A (2.5 liter V6, 200 HP/178 lb.-ft). This became the base engine in Inspire & Saber (the name Vigor was dropped), twins exported to Japan from the USA. The other engine was 3.2 liter V6 (originally pumping 225 HP. MY2001 onwards, JDM market received only the 260 HP version of the J32A).
Vigor, Saber and Inspire share a common theme. Accord is the basis. The same would be true today, with Accord, TSX (Vigor/Saber 25V/Inspire 25V) and TL. 2.5TL was gone in 1999 for a very good reason. The MSRP on 3.2TL was slashed by a few grand, to the price point that 2.5TL occupied. Vigor/2.5TL, I believe, was more expensive than TSX.
One major difference between 2.5TL/Vigor and TSX is their orientation. Vigor was a touring luxury sedan with good appointment (although it used a long wheelbase of about 111 inch, it was still a compact). TSX goes to the sportier side of the spectrum, with less money.
IMO, TSX is more like a 4-door Prelude with the intentions to fill in the void left by the absence of Vigor/2.5TL in the American market.
When you say TSX is meant as a 4 door Prelude, that is music to my ears. I had a 1992 5 speed Prelude for many years and really liked it. Best car I ever had.
If the TSX can give me that and a real back seat with a little more quiet on the highway, it will be a winner for me.
I am considering 4 door, Japanese FWD or AWD sedans with available manual transmissions.
My final 4 are TSX, Accord EX - Leather with 5 speed, Subaru WRX and Nissan Maxima SE with 6 speed manual.
For my current Accord replacement, the candidates from Honda are Accord EX-L and TSX. The Accord advantage would be size and cost. The former is not really a big deal since 89-97 Accords are good enough, in terms of size, for me. Cost will be a compromise between driving experience and additional features that TSX promises to bring versus $2500 saved if I get the Accord (EX-L).
BTW, discovered R&T review of Acura TSX.
TSX appears to have better fuel economy estimate than the Prelude. As for performance, I wouldn't be surprised to see it being comparable to Prelude. I think TSX has more aggressive chassis tuning than Prelude did, but Prelude was a bit lighter (about 100 lb.). I'm anxious to figure out the performance aspect in person.
The reason being that when Acura introduced the 2001 3.2TL with absolutely no difference between the 2000 3.2TL, people assumed that the remodelled TL was a long way off. People then went ahead and purchased the 2001 TL. Around 4 months into the 2001 model year, Acura introduced the 2002 TL, with memory seats, reverse tilting mirror, standard foglights, re-modelled front-end and rear, along with differences in the HID lights. All of these, for the exact same price as the 4-month old 2001 TL. They also introduced the TL-s. Thus a brand-new TL, just a couple of months into the new model year, was an "old-version" TL, belonging to the previous model year.
You personally may not have any problem with that, but a lot of others who paid out a lot of money, have issues with Acura. If they had known of these changes coming a couple of months into the new model year, none of them would have purchased the 2001 TL.
It could happen withe the TSX too.
Later...AH
Early 2001 model you brought up was not TL, but CL/CL Type-S. TL Type-S did arrive, but a few months later.
1998: New TL (MY1999) is launched (Fall)
1999: TL (MY2000) gets 5-speed auto (Fall)
2001: TL (MY2002) gets Type-S trim (Spring?) and cosmetic changes.
2003: TL (MY2004) is the expected launch of new TL (Fall?)
TL has followed the Honda tradition of fourth year cosmetic changes (MY2002) and five year redesign cycle.
As far as TSX is concerned, it is possible that we will see a higher trim (just like TL Type-S is to TL). Cosmetic and minor changes can be expected in the fourth year if Acura/Honda continues the tradition of five-year redesign cycle. Before we can expect another trim of TSX, I believe we will see the new TL, the new RL, the new NSX and possibly a new compact SUV.
Given the TSX's tighter-ratio gearbox and the slight torque advantage (which also peaks lower than in the Prelude), I'd be inclined to think that a well-driven TSX could get the jump (and maintain it) on a Prelude.
Even with the 17" wheels, though, I'm going to have to wait to drive the TSX to see if it handles as well as the Prelude. I suspect that the longer wheelbase and higer CG (a 6'4" driver fits?--wow!) may not give the same feeling of nimbleness found in the Prelude. I know the TSX is tuned well, but there's still a bunch more steel behind its B-pillar than in the Prelude.
I really wish I had the option of buying a TSX without the luxury stuff. Even a Type-S variant would still swing too far towards the ritzy for my needs and tastes.
It is interesting that R&T review mentions as TSX being okay for people as tall as 6'4" (assuming that the torso/leg distribution is addressed), another of the common complaints against Hondas of the past. The headroom doesn't suggest that though.
Prelude 5-speed was indeed a shade less than 3000 lb. and the Type-SH was a shade over 3100 lb (sold only with 5-speed manual). But the fact is, cars aren't getting lighter, especially with added content to address comfort and safety issues. Honda actually surprised me by maintaining the weight on Accord EX-L, as well as EXV6. Otherwise, cars like CL, TL, BMW M3, Audi A4/Q are quite porky at well over 3400 lb. Even BMW 325 is listed at 3259 lb. with manual transmission.
Of course, part of it might be from the way some people drive'em.
It is a great car in its own right and it will be in our family a long time to come, but I sure miss my stick and the handling of the Prelude. The OutBack was my third choice (after WRX Wagon with Stick or Maxima SE with Stick). But the wife wanted an auto and that makes sense for the Outback wagon.
That the TSX can seat drivers as tall as 6' 4" is also a plus for me -- that is precisely how tall I am! Most of my height is in my legs so the Prelude worked out great - short roof line but long reach to the pedals for my long legs.
Not a day goes by when I do not miss that Prelude. It was a 1992 Si. I had it from 1994 - 2001. No Vtec and No LSD. It was before all that. 2nd to last body style. What I enjoyed most was the handling and the easy to use shifter. Power was 160 hp but that was fine for that size car for me.
My tact with my spouse is to replace the 2000 Volvo S40 she drives now with a TSX or the like. She inherits the Subaru and I get the TSX. She has heard me complain about the lack o' stick and she knows it is just a question of time. The debate now is sooner (me) later (her).
You always hear about these cliche dilemmas between spouses! As we are finding out here -- there is a grain of truth to them.
Good luck convincing your sig other that the TSX is the way to go, Robert!
I understand what you're saying about how the TSX would've been difficult to place in the Honda line-up ("What's this -- a shrunken Accord?"). But, I can conceive the JDM/Euro Accord in US Honda showrooms as an Accord Type-R (or even Si, if you will).
Given the rather low sales expectations for the TSX (relatively speaking, of course), it looks like the car is certainly a safer bet as an Acura. The fact that it had to be equppied more lavishly to fit as an Acura only helps to reinforce Acura's placement as a "luxury value" brand. Selling it at a higher profit margin doesn't hurt either, I suppose.
Hunter - The grass is always greener on the other side of an MY change. People will always be petty about changes no matter how long they've lived with the car. I know 99 owners who wished that they'd waited for the 5 speed auto and 2000 owners who drool over the 2002 Type S. How PO'd the person gets depends as much on the person as the length of time between changes.
Also, these changes are simply a reality of the auto business. The TL was in no way unique on this point. For example, Subaru did the same thing with the refreshed Forester in 2000. There are others.
That said, it is very unlikely that this will happen with the first year of the TSX. I'm sure there is a possibility, but I don't think it's one worth discussing. There is simply no reason for Acura to do it. I can think of a few things that would go wrong for the TSX, but none would require mid-MY changes in the very first year.
Ditto. I agree that this would have made sense. However, I suspect that the Accord Coupe with the FP enhancements is Honda's answer to that particular market niche.
But a 4-month model year (2001) ?? That is short by any Auto industry yardstick. The 2001 model year folks were holding a car that had depreciated by a year, just 4 months into the new model year !! A more ethical approach for the Automaker would have been to introduce the remodelled model earlier (the 2002 being introduced as a 2001 in case of the TL/TL-s) or stretch the current model by another couple of months (if the new version was not ready yet).
From a buyer's perspective, in case of the TSX, it may not happen this drastically - hopefully.
Later...AH
Good luck to the people who are purchasing this car.
Later...AH
But it's like I wrote the first time; this is Honda's answer, not mine.
Ethics? I'm not going there.
Price? I paid $27.6K for my TL which was considered a pretty good deal (Feb 2001). While I truly enjoy the TL, it lacks several items that are stock on the TSX like VSA, 6 gears (even the 5AT is better than the TL's), better mpg and emissions, telescopic wheel, better handling, 6-disk changer, and curtain airbags. Yes, I like the TL's V6 and roomy interior, but the TSX has much more sport and at least as much luxury for a lower price.
Too bad my wife's TL will probably last ten years... :-(
Honda should build EVERYTHING.
But not everybody is value conscious to appreciate a Honda. That would make a lot of people, sad. ;-)
Rob,
I wasn't expecting it to get to the dealerships this early. Any signs of 6-speed yet?
Even then, the current TL/TL-s has dual memory seats, power passenger seats, spacious interior, more comfortable ride, reverse tilting passenger mirror, VSA (TL-s), more powerful/torquier engine, standard foglights and a variety of other factors going for it, that are lacking in the TSX.
Of course, when you purchased your 2001 TL, you missed out on a lot of the above goodies, that came into being just 4 months after your car was introduced, at the exact same price as your TL.
Later...AH
I am interested to see how long the car will sell for MSRP and how much demand there will be in the first few months.
Hunter - 2001 was not the end of the model life for the TL. Just 6 months prior, people were paying MSRP for the same car. Part of the reason why I got such a good deal on the TL was because the 2002 model was coming. When it arrived on showroom floors, the real-world price went back up a few notches. So, no, most were not able to get a 2002 with all the goodies for the same exact price as my 2001. Even now (the very end of it's model life), the TMV for the TL is $27,506; only $94 less than what my wife and I paid.
Of course, this is all a comparison of a street price for the TL to the MSRP of the TSX. If we compared asking prices, the TSX makes out like a bandit. And, as Robert mentioned, some of the equipment you've mentioned is only standard or avilable on the TL-S, which has an even higher MSRP and street price.
I'm not saying that the TSX is a steal. I think it's priced where it should be. Frankly, if the TSX wore an Audi, BMW, or MB badge, the asking price would be 2-4K higher. You'd have to fight with a salesman to get it discounted to where the TSX starts.
I went straight for the 6 speed. It was still being prepped. It was unattended in a service bay so I had a chance to eyeball it thoroughly. It is a much bigger car than I expected which was a nice surprise. I'd say it is about the same size as an A4. Bigger than a BMW 3 series.
The exterior is well finished. The car has more presence than the photos would suggest. Sort of heavier on the bottom and lighter on the top. The C pillar is very reminiscent of a 3 or 5 series BMW.
Being 6 foot 4, interior space was a concern for me. My concerns were allayed - there is plenty of front seat room for me. The blue dash controls are very classy. The silver 6 speed I was in had a black leather interior with the silver faux titanium dash trim pieces. It is obviously plastic -- real metal would have been nice. But was convincing enough and nicer than the silver trim you would find in a G35 Infiniti. Maybe because there is less of it.
I was impressed with how large the interior was. The back seat is definitely useable. Larger than the WRX's back seat.
The interior is very good quality. Good controls and switches. The stereo sounded nice. Soft touch materials in the door pulls like a VW or Audi. All and all I would say it is a very nice interior - akin to an Audi or a VW - maybe a tick below an Audi.
I was surprised to be allowed a brief test drive but that is exactly what I got!
I was able to take the 6 speed a brief 2 mile jaunt. No, I could not open it up or really test the handling. Salesman was with me - I was the first customer to get to drive the unit so they were pretty cautious. The tech who prepared the car drove it before me said he really liked the handling but found it underpowered.
I was very pleased with the feel of the car. It felt taut but not too harsh over bumps. If you have ever drive a 1992 - 96 Prelude (the last manual Honda I owned) it felt very much like that. The interior width feels about the same as the Prelude. From the front seat it felt very much the same as that Prelude but quieter. The power was about the same. My Prelude Si was 160 hp and less weight and it felt about the same as this 200 hp Acura.
I want a longer test drive including some highway miles but from my brief taste, I was favorably impressed. I think people will like this car. I know I do!
nice handling. conservative, buttoned down styling
i drove the automatic....and it was woefully underpowered......i was flooring constantly to go anywhere, and all that 4 cylinder raquet. I am sure it didn't help that i had a 300 lb salesman in the car with me
i am sure the 6 speed is better....but i don't think i will buy b/c of the engine..
also, they said the are selling all at sticker
This car is only around 160+ lbs heavier than the 4-cylinder Honda Accord and I am truly surprised at this assessment. I felt the Honda Accord to be pretty peppy. Maybe a longer drive might provide a different impression ??
Later...AH
It was the fellow who was detailing the car before I drove it who gave his personal and honest assessment that the car was under powered. Compared to some of the other Acuras he takes out, it probably is.
But I thought it had adequate power. Let me put it this way, the power was NOT something that would stop me from buying the car. It felt very buttoned down, of a piece and refined. The Power felt good. It sounded and felt, again, like that 1992 Prelude.
Recalling a test drive of an Audi 1.8T - it felt similar in power to that.
If I wanted power with a stick in a Japanese Sedan, I would get an Altima SE 3.5 with a manual. Probably cost about the same. I intend to test drive that before I buy. But my recollection from the auto Altima I drove was that it was not as good a handler as the TSX.
Another car more on the sporty track is the Subaru WRX. That car is definitely a hoot and quite a deal if you do not mind a no nonsense interior.
The TSX's strong suit is build quality, handling and refinement. Plus a tad of exclusivity to set it appart from the Accord herd. Any rational person would say hey -- $22k for an Accord EX 5 speed with Leather is just fine. Good handling power and room to be found there at a savings of about $5000.
The TSX is for someone who values that handling, refinement and extra detailing enough to pay the extra $5k.
In other words, with a 17.1 gallon fuel tank, the more spacious and slightly less fun-to-drive Honda Accord, could result in approximately 86 additional miles before a re-fuel (when compared to the TSX), when running with cheaper regular fuel. For instance, if you get 250 miles in the TSX for a tankful of premium, then you would be able to get 335+ miles in the Honda Accord, with the same amount of regular fuel, when driven under the exact same conditions. Again, you may not consider this cost significant, so the point is moot.
Later...AH
No doubt, Hunter. The Accord is the rational choice. TSX the indulgent one - at least for me and my budget. Might be the budget choice for someone hoping to get a BMW 330.
No one ever got poor in America catering to indulgence!