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.
Options

Acura TSX

1232426282999

Comments

  • varmintvarmint Member Posts: 6,326
    I stopped at an Acura dealer on the way home tonight. They had a black 6MT Navi in the back, but it was still undergoing prep work. There was plastic on the body panels and road splatter all over it. I got to sit in it, but no test drive. Sticker was the expected $26,960 + 2K for the Nav.

    Anyway, here are my initial impressions:

    The interior is what everyone seems to be saying, refined, comfortable, well-crafted, and stylish despite the use of faux materials (plood in this case). The front seats were very comfortable. As good as the new Accord. I'm 6'2" and 215lbs for reference. There was absolutely no issue with headroom, which came as a surprise to me (my head is too close to the roof in my TL). Visibility seems good in all directions. The back seat is snug, but not uncomfortable. The trunk is narrow at the wheel wells, but deep enough. The back seats fold forward.

    I have one interior gripe. Both the steering wheel controls and shifter knob are made to resemble the metallic accents used in the ebony and quartz interiors. IMHO, it doesn't look quite right with the wood trim on the dash (parchment interior). The wood looks fine, but one tap with a fingernail gives away it's plastic credentials. I agree with Nowakj66, the blue-tinted tach/speedo looks great. I love that. All other controls were typical Honda.

    I was afraid that the bottom-hinged gas pedal would be too short for my big feet, but that was not an issue. The clutch wasn't stiff and the length of travel was respectably short. Obviously, the car wasn't going anywhere, but I rowed through the gears and got the expected sense of precision. Plenty of leg and knee room with space to shuffle my feet.

    The exterior looks good. The rims are a bit simple looking, but their size in proportion to the car give it a serious profile. Painting the brake calipers might give the tires some style. The high beltline bears no resemblance to the Corrola. Up front, the lights give the face some personality. Once again the car was partly wrapped up, but I was miffed about the character line running from the tail lights to the front wheel well. In pictures, it appears to be quite distinctive. In real life, it's too subtle.

    From the driver's seat, this car has it all over my TL. It's far more stylish and just as comfortable. The exterior is a toss up.
  • varmintvarmint Member Posts: 6,326
    The salesman knew the car. Usually, I know more of the features and specs on the cars and their competition. This guy knew his product.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    Acura has mentioned the deliberate tweaking of the DBW in less than spirited throttle use to prevent wheel spin. That could be the reason for some people finding it less powerful, or they are comparing it to more powerful cars like TL, Accord V6 or Altima 3.5SE.
  • bodble2bodble2 Member Posts: 4,514
    An Acura salesman at the auto show in Vancouver told me the Canadian MSRP will be $34,800 for both auto and 6-speed. Of course, there is no Nav option in Canada. He wouldn't let me climb up onto the rotating platform to see the interior though :(

    $34,800 would be $2,300 more than an Accord EX-V6 in Canada....
  • creakid1creakid1 Member Posts: 2,032
    I wonder how many auto drivers' are gonna enjoy this car's poky-ness w/o winding hard. I'm not saying it's weaker than the 4-cyl Accord, but the Accord's got 6-cyl available. The auto is not just fewer gears, it's so wide spread that the stick's 6th gear revs over 25% higher than the auto's 5th gear. & how often will an auto driver take the advantage of this engine's specially-engineered mighty power from 6000 to 7000rpm? I'll bet the auto version will start to discount sooner than the stick.

    My sister was crazy about the Mini Cooper. But as soon as she discovered the auto version lacks p/u... Who's gonna pay that kind of $ w/ full of compromises!
  • bodble2bodble2 Member Posts: 4,514
    The '97 - '01 Prelude had a similar high-revving 4-banger with 200hp and only 156 lb-ft. of torque. The auto tranny was also only a 4-speed. (Curb weight was only slightly lower). But there weren't that much complaint about it being underpowered. Couldn't it be the drive-by-wire in the TSX being slower to respond?
  • nowakj66nowakj66 Member Posts: 709
    It is the manual tranny that gets me interested in the TSX.

    It is a nice car with a distinctive profile. Another fellow was checking out the TSX with his girlfriend while I was at the dealer and he wanted the auto. To each his own.

    For me the stick coupled with handling and refinement sets this apart from the V6 Accord.

    I want a Japanese sedan with manual for under $30k. This just might be the pick of the litter.

     The WRX is sportier but a little more basic interior with less dealer care. Every time a blue WRX sedan goes by, my adrenaline surges. That is one sweet driving car.

    The Accord is a great value in 5 speed leather but it is missing a few things I would like -- one is Blue car with black interior! Others are homelink, traction control and VSA and a decent sound system.

    I have yet to take an 04 Maxima SE 6 speed for a test drive but the 03 I drove was very comfortable. The Max would be more expensive and probably not the handler the TSX is. But have more room.

    I have driven the Mazda 6 but found the interior to be a bit weak. Actually preferred the WRX interior since it was not trying to be fancy. Only drove the 4 which was disapointingly low power. Maybe the 6 cy would be better.

    Infiniti G35 is RWD only and more expensive. I like it but RWD in midwest can be a drag. But I need to test that as well.

    Am I missing any Japanese sedans under $30k with a stick? The Camry does not interest me but I suppose I should give it a try.

    Do I sound like someone trying to talk himself into a TSX? :-)

    At this point the Subaru WRX, Accord EX Leather, and TSX are the real contenders for my $.
  • ickes_mobileickes_mobile Member Posts: 675
    There is a two-page add in the May edition of MotorTrend for the TSX...
  • chillenhondachillenhonda Member Posts: 105
    A quick test drive may not be too representative of the power of the TSX. When i bough tmy 99 Prelude, the test drive revealed it being quick, but not noticeably faster than my 91 Accord. It never felt like 200hp or a 0-60 time under 7 seconds. I realized, after buying it, that I never revved it past 4500 or so on the test drive, and that the nature of the vtec engine is very high revving. While the TSX's ivtec engine may produce more low end power and flatter torque curve, its 200hp still peaks at 6800 I believe. Rev the crap out of it, drive it like its meant to be driven, and Im sure its fast enough.
  • bbartlow1bbartlow1 Member Posts: 22
    The Accord's price advantage just got a bit bigger. My local dealer here is starting to blow out some excess inventory. The 5-sp EX now about 19,200, auto 19,950. Not sure if they're dealing on the EXL's yet.
  • webby1webby1 Member Posts: 209
    This price sounds right...the Acura dealer in Kitchener, Ontario committed to under $35,000 Cdn
  • varmintvarmint Member Posts: 6,326
    "The 22K Accord will also net you 26mpg in the City and 34mpg in the Highway, with regular fuel, against 21mpg city/29mpg highway in the TSX with Premium fuel, again something that will add up over time." - Hunter001

    Then don't use premium fuel. It's only required for maximum performance.
  • umyayaumyaya Member Posts: 123
    I love my EX-V6 Navi, but oh how I wish I could trade it for a manual TSX Navi. Maybe one day I'll find a guy on here who's wife doesn't want the stick and we can trade... it could happen, right?

    My Accord is great, and I even like the body alot, but I wish I had a sportier suspension and Bose system. I don't know that this car will only sell for sticker, when I got my Accord in Nov. the Navi was brand new and so hot and I got it $100 over invoice. I think you will find dealers willing to deal if you get them on the right days.
  • 1wiseguy1wiseguy Member Posts: 120
    According to the latest from club TSX, the Canadian price is $34,800 + 950 PDI. Add in the A/C tax and the gas tax and you're at $36K. Add in the GST and PST and you're over 41K.

    I like the car, but I don't think I like it that much.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    The only time any car needs to be revved harder is when you want it to (and need when it is auto). For around town driving my 3200 lb. Accord (only 150 HP, taller gearing and 4-speed auto) does just fine with sub-3000 rpm engine speed. Four or five times a day, the tach gets past 5000 rpm when I merge onto a freeway or have to pass another vehicle.

    The same would apply for TSX, or just about any car. The TSX auto tranny advantage is that it has five cogs (hence geared closer), it is geared shorter and comes with Sport Shift. But, Prelude (4-speed) and TL (5-speed), also had Sport Shift, right? Now, here is a big difference. The TSX's sport shift allows control even in the first gear that was not available in the other cars.

    Another point that is often missed is that, although TSX gets its peak power (200 HP) at 6800 rpm (reasonably high), 170+ horses are on tap at about 5500 rpm and 180+ HP at 6000 rpm. If one could rev Accord V6 to 6250 rpm for 240 HP or Mazda6s to 6300 rpm for 220 HP, why would it be different for shorter geared (than the other two) for TSX?
  • viper0074viper0074 Member Posts: 56
    FYI ...

    Honda announced the TSX's MSRP as 26,490. I don't know if that includes destination.

    Same price for manual and auto. Only option is the $2000 navigation system.

    A little bit more than I had hoped for, but not terrible I guess.

    Peter
  • varmintvarmint Member Posts: 6,326
    Umyaya - I expect the TSX will stay at sticker for a while. Limited production volume will keep it in demand.

    "Four or five times a day, the tach gets past 5000 rpm when I merge onto a freeway or have to pass another vehicle." - Robertsmx

    Geez, where do you have to drive? I've got a 3,200 lbs CR-V with only 146hp and 133 lb-ft. I drive rte 128 and 95 around Boston, but the only time the tach goes over 3,500 rpms is when I'm "having fun".
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    I've lead foot, varmint. Every time I see a merger ramp, I drool. For city driving, I never get past 3000 rpm.
  • gee35coupegee35coupe Member Posts: 3,387
    You can drive it all day long at 2000-3000 rpm but yet get 7.5sec 0-60 when you foot it. If the TSX is anything like that it'll be fine.
  • webby1webby1 Member Posts: 209
    I agree...all of sudden the TL at 37,800 with a 2K
    discount looks very good. Even you are taking a risk with the tranny!
    Also, who knows what problems are you getting in with a new generation of Acura's?
  • varmintvarmint Member Posts: 6,326
    I find that the 3.2 V6 connected to the pedal in my TL calls my name far too often. Mild mannered Varmint, who normally keeps it below 70, is scootin' down the freeway over 80 for no good reason. I'd probably feel differently if I drove it everyday, but the beast gets away from me! A TL-S would be a disaster. =)

    I expect the TSX would suit me better. Decent, but not aggressive, performance until I ask for more. The power will be there when I want it, and only when I want it.
  • gee35coupegee35coupe Member Posts: 3,387
    The power is there but you have to rev a bit to get to it. I have no problem with that setup.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    The power is there but you have to rev a bit to get to it.
    That is simply a misconception. One would have to rev to 6000 rpm to get 184 horses from BMW 325 and 170 horses from A4/1.8T. And then, there is gearing. Shorter gearing automatically takes care of the extra revving part.
  • varmintvarmint Member Posts: 6,326
    Short gearing makes it easier to get from the low rpm range to the higher end. But extra torque does the same thing.
  • jjgittesjjgittes Member Posts: 54
    I just test drove a TSX. Overall, it looks better and seems larger than I expected. The power in the auto I drove was OK, but certainly did not stand out as exceptional, like say a G35. It was priced at $26,990, plus a floormat/protection package for $300 already on all the cars at the dealership, for a total of about $27,300. Now, right next to the TSX, the dealer had TL's for $28,300, with special financing. Also, the Honda dealership nextdoor had V6 accords with leather for $24k and change. I do like the new 2 door accords, I must say. Thus, the TSX is nice, but for me the pricing, when considering other Honda/Acura products, not to mention G35s (with 6 cyl's and rwd) and others, just doesn't work for me. Maybe the TSX price will come down with time...
  • chillenhondachillenhonda Member Posts: 105
    The TSX isnt about value. Its about the 6-speed, the 7100rpm redline, the handling, and the performance. The Accord and TL are already good values, their intent is completely different from the TSX's.
  • himilerhimiler Member Posts: 1,209
    For the benefit of all, I am forcibly restraining myself from commenting upon the notion that the TSX is primarily a "performance" car.

    Must post this quickly!
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    Himiler
    From Honda, S2000 is a performance car. TSX, is a near luxury sport sedan.
  • markjennmarkjenn Member Posts: 1,142
    There had been a lot of good discussion on this board about the plusses and minuses of the TSX, particularly whether it represent a good value against competing cars, of which the Accord V6 and Mazda 6s seem to be at the head of the class. As several magazines have pointed out, the car has nice content for the price, but ends up being right in a "no mans land" between the most expensive FWD sedans and the least expensive RWD sedans.

    Which makes me wonder ... with such renewed interest in RWD as a better basic platform for handling, and BMW and MB doing quite getting folks to ante up a considerable premium for RWD's benefits, why the heck hasn't a mfg come up with a small, 4-cyl, <$25K RWD sports sedan?

    The old-timers in this group may fondly remember the Datsun 510 and Opel Manta from the 70's as great examples of this breed, cars that were very popular 4-cyl RWD sports sedans. These were wonderful cars, but when FWD took over in the 80's, and SUVs/AWD took off in the 90's, somehow the concept of a light, great handling, moderate power, fuel-efficient relatively cheap RWD sports sedan got lost. We've got some great FWD cars out there and some expensive RWD cars out there, but no inexpensive RWD cars. BMW has flirted with 4-cyl 3-series here and there, but always says they can't get the price down enough. Ok, maybe THEY can't, but I bet Honda can.

    If the TSX was RWD, I think we'd all be lining up in droves to buy one. It can't cost more to produce a RWD car than a FWD car - in fact, when FWD was first introduced, it was more expensive because transaxles and sophisticated front suspension systems were required rather than simple drive shafts and rear differentials.

    I don't get it. Why doesn't somebody produce a RWD $25K TSX? The only explanation I can think of is that to produce a $25K sports sedan with adequate content, the mfgs have to start with $17K ecomony sedans, and they're all currently FWD. And you can't decontent cars like the 325i and IS300 sufficiently to get them cheap enough.

    But I think someone could justify a new RWD economy sedan - they'd be the only ones in a huge market space.

    - Mark
  • varmintvarmint Member Posts: 6,326
    Himiler - FWIW, I agree. The TSX is not "primarily a performance car". I have yet to see anything with a back seat which I would call "primarily" a performance car. It's the difference between "sport" and "sportee", as Shiftwright likes to write.

    I think it's pretty obvious that comments here regarding performance are to be taken within the confines of the sporty near-luxury sedan segment. IMHO, there's no need to append every sentence describing performance attributes with, "...for a sedan", or "...for the price".

    "It can't cost more to produce a RWD car than a FWD car" - Markjenn

    Platform sharing. Yes, it would cost considerably more to develop a completely different chassis, manufacturing line, and parts sourcing for a single car. You'd have to make several cars on that platform to make it worth your while, or charge a whole lot for the thing.
  • sunilbsunilb Member Posts: 407
    but, Honda has already spent a good bit developing the S2000 chassis... couldn't they have used that as the basis for a RWD, <$25K sedan AND actually reduced their overall costs (by achieving some economies of scale)??

    Clearly, if the mfr. doesn't have any RWD platform, then it'll cost more.
  • himilerhimiler Member Posts: 1,209
    varmint -- Not to put too fine a point on it, but the M3 has a rear seat, and would, I believe, qualify as a performance car in the view of most people. Ditto the RX-8.

    robertsmx -- I'm not knocking the TSX's capabilities (which appear to be downright spectacular for a front-drive sedan), I just can't fully agree with chillenhonda's assertion that the TSX is "about the 6-speed, the 7100rpm redline, the handling, and the performance."

    Like you said, it's a luxury sport sedan, not a performance car.

    markjenn -- From the sound of it, the forthcoming BMW 1-Series will be right up your alley!
  • himilerhimiler Member Posts: 1,209
    Using the X-structure backbone of the S2000's platform would be too difficult to make a sports sedan from. By the time you got done modifying it, the venture would've already ceased being profitable.

    Better for Honda to start for scratch for a RWD platform, which could easily facilitate the incorporation of IMA or even *gasp* AWD. Having a platform flexible enough to use in various models and drivetrain configurations is the key to profitability.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    It can't cost more to produce a RWD car than a FWD car
    True. Having a platform would help. S2000's chassis may be the closest thing from Honda to deliver a sport sedan, but its production line is already clogged up. It is manufactured on one of the most specialized production lines that Honda uses, alongside NSX, and it is a small facility. Interestingly, the facility is also used to manufacture the small volume Insight. With 12K S2000s, 5K Insights and a few hundred NSXs per year, there may not be enough room to develop another car. Insight may be relieved of its duties, soon, but we don't know which direction Honda is going to take with the NSX, or if they have bigger plans.

    That said, S2000 platform was probably developed exclusively for a sportster, and may not be practical enough for a near luxury sport sedan, at least at a reasonable price. Honda may be thinking on the lines of AWD cars in the near future. The recent prototypes tend to suggest that. That may not only satisfy a typical enthusiast's needs, but people living in the snow belt may also remain interested, like they are with Audi's offerings.
  • himilerhimiler Member Posts: 1,209
    Eventually, Honda is going to need AWD to stay in the hunt. Heck, even M-B is going to offer it on all their models! AWD makes it much eaiser for engineers to incorporate active safety systems into a car, which is ostensibly the reason that Benz is doing it.

    Just what we need, more electronic nannies.
  • nowakj66nowakj66 Member Posts: 709
    Subaru WRX provides stellar AWD performance under $25k.
  • creakid1creakid1 Member Posts: 2,032
    The original Datsun 510 was cheap 'cause Japanese cars used to be cheap. Later, only the top-of -the-line 810/Maxima kept the ind rear.

    Even the newest('87) & most expensive rwd Corolla GT-S only got solid rear axle. Only after '87, the rwd Volvos got ind rear, but only on their top-of-the-line models.

    The upcoming 1-series is cool. It's 6" narrower than the 3-series.

    VW is most likely fighting back w/ a "cheap" front engine/rwd Porsche.

    A stripped IS200 should work. I doubt if the S2000 platform got enough suspension travel for decent comfort.
  • iceman16iceman16 Member Posts: 38
    IMO, the 6-speed Accord V6 coupe and the 6-speed TSX are the only Japanese manual tranny cars under $30k worth considering. I drove the TSX tonight, and the Mazda6 dropped off my list. I was hoping the TSX would be a 4-door Prelude. It's better. It has the handling and spirit of a Prelude, and the luxury and style of a TL. But hey, do not take my word for this. Go and drive one.
  • iceman16iceman16 Member Posts: 38
    No no, do NOT rev the crap out of the TSX. Remember, flat torque curve. It doesn't matter when you shift. The hardest thing to get used to is, how quiet it is, given how fast it is. You can go seriously fast in this car without realizing how fast you are going. Watch the speedometer, not the tach!! By the way, did I mention it was fast?
  • stretchsjestretchsje Member Posts: 700
    "No no, do NOT rev the crap out of the TSX. Remember, flat torque curve. It doesn't matter when you shift."

    Yes it does. Flat torque curve = linear horsepower curve = more power at higher revs. Also, lower gearing is needed to make up for the (relatively) small displacement, low-torque engine, and upshifting negates that.

    "You can go seriously fast in this car without realizing how fast you are going. Watch the speedometer, not the tach!!"

    So are you saying the car is boring, that the car isolates the driver from the road, or both?

    "I was hoping the TSX would be a 4-door Prelude. It's better."

    Credibility... lost...

    I hope to go test drive one of these this week or next, and I'll eat a sock if I agree with you on any of this.
  • hunter001hunter001 Member Posts: 851
    Were you not the one making unsubstantiated comments about sub 7 second 0-60 etc., in the TSX a couple of days ago in the other comparisons forum ? I assume that at that time you had not driven the TSX. Are you an Acura dealer ? Just curious....

    Later...AH
  • reds2000reds2000 Member Posts: 2
    Sorry in advance for the long post.
    Some background first--I'm 32 years old with a wife and a 1 year old daughter. We currently have an '01 V6 accord for family duty. I drive a "beater car" to work, while VERY occasionally driving my S2000 on sunny days. We had purchased the convertible before the kid came along, so basically the convertible sits now for long periods of time. When I first heard about the TSX, I was extremely interested. I thought, finally, a high revving 4 cyl. with a 6 speed manual, all with family friendly 4 doors! It looked promising as a car that could replace the now rarely driven S2000, while keeping driving fun and excitement at acceptable levels. For better or worse, here are my views on the TSX.

    I test drove a light blue 6 speed, with Nav. Here are the positives:

    Great fit and finish--At least on par with the S2000, and better than my '01 Accord. The body panel gaps are tight and even. Paint looked great.

    The interior materials are impressive--I would say on par with VW/Audi, while the ergonomics handily beat the German manufacturers.

    Looks better in person, than in photos. It has a very solid, buttoned down look to it, like the wind won't be able to push it around.

    The engine is extremely smooth and creamy, and revs freely up to the redline. No coarseness here.

    Very quiet interior, so "Lexus-like" that it leads to my negatives:

    As it is being marketed as a "sports" sedan going up against BMW and Audi, I was expecting more of an engaging drive. The car is so isolated from everything around you (the road, the wind, the engine), that I just couldn't feel any "soul" coming from the car. I expect a rather "appliance" like experience in my family sedan Accord, but was expecting more from the sporty TSX.

    The power felt underwhelming, considering I drove the 6-speed. I was again expecting more quickness. I occasionally revved it past 6000 rpm (not the best for the engine, I know), but never felt a great surge in power. In normal daily driving (i.e. revs staying below 4000rpm), my V6 accord feels (and probably is) faster, even though it has the same horsepower and is an automatic.

    The weight of the car really plays against the driving experience. It's a heavy car, and there is no easy way around that. It really handles no differently dynamically from my Accord. Again, in daily driving circumstances, I feel the sporty setup of the TSX just doesn't shine out. Maybe on a test track the "sporty" suspension setup would prove more capable than the Accord.

    The 6-speed shifts nicely enough (not as precisely as the S2000, but I doubt anything else does). However, at initial tip-in of the throttle at startup, there was an annoying hesitation. As I pressed down on the accelerator, there was a pause before the engine revs would catch up. This made smooth clutch releases tough, as the timing in letting the clutch out had to be "delayed" so as to let the revs catch up before full disengagement. Again, maybe I am spoiled by the instant throttle response of the S2000, but the TSX throttle still felt like it had a "glitch."

    The price will be a negative, at least for a while. The saleperson said that the car was selling for sticker price. United Buying Service (UBS) lists the prices for all versions of the Accord at $160 over invoice, with no processing fees. That puts an EX-L 4cyl, at about 21k, while a V6 EX is about 24k. Assuming I could somehow get the dealer down a thousand off the TSX, the Accords are still 2-5 thousand cheaper. The driving dynamics and feature contents of the TSX don't separate it enough from the Accord to justify the price gap, especially if you insist on a manual tranny Accord (a 5k difference).

    So, overall, you can see I was left feeling disappointed overall. I went in expecting to drive a sporty and engaging 4-door sedan, and left feeling like I had just driven my own Accord. When I get a chance, I intend on driving a manual V6 Mazda 6 (more power), and the BMW 325i (the "benchmark", according to the mags) in order to see if my expectations of a sports sedan are too inflated.

    Again, sorry for the long post.

    --Dave
  • umyayaumyaya Member Posts: 123
    I guess I haven't really checked the price, but why isn't anyone mentioning the IS300 here. It seems to me that this car is meant to be almost an IS300 but cheaper. Sounds to me like the IS300 is what you all want. Stick, 4drs, sports, luxury. But I don't know enough about the cars in its class (the IS300) to know if the others beat it. Just wondered why it's not mentioned. No, I don't own one, I own the 03 EX-V6 sedan, which is great except I'd like the option of a sportier suspension as that thing really flies on the highway very smoothly. I find I'm going 85 and then I hit a turn (the Beltway in D.C. is like this, you go fast, then turn, then fast) and there is a bit to much sway for me. Almost a bit scary. Of course I could slow down, but it's silly that this car is so fast and smooth and then just feels a little soft in turns. Anyone else?
  • s852s852 Member Posts: 1,051
    Someone test drove the TSX and posted here that it had fake wood.
    Numerous reviews say that that the TSX and all new Acura models after the TSX will only have real wood, if any.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    Also, lower gearing is needed to make up for the (relatively) small displacement, low-torque engine, and upshifting negates that.
    Low gearing is often not needed (it is quite tall in my Accord, and relatively taller in Prelude), higher redline can provide room for lower gearing. As for upshifts, it would still be lower than it would be, if it started tall.

    BMW uses of short gearing, regardless of engine displacement. It helps in getting more effect out of any engine. In case of S2000, I wish Honda was a little more aggressive in gearing like they are with the new ITR. Overall drive ratio of ITR in first two gears is 15.55:1 and 10.10:1. In S2000, despite of having 6% more revs to play with, the overall drive ratios are 14.90:1 and 9.69:1 respectively, or about 4% taller. OTOH, BMW M3's Overall drive ratio in the first two gears are 15.00:1 (shorter than S2000) and 9.23:1 (taller than S2000).

    So are you saying the car is boring, that the car isolates the driver from the road, or both?
    I wouldn't associate refinement with isolation. These are two different things. Isolated driver may be as good as just sitting in the car instead of driving it. But without isolating the driver, refinement can come in the form of NVH suppression, and a linear power delivery from the engine. Prelude was more refined than Integra GS-R. That didn't equate to isolation, IMO and many have suggested that Prelude should have been an Acura, and Integra, a Honda. TSX is definitely an Acura.

    The power curve from the TSX engine is apparently extremely linear, and people expecting a surge at so-called VTEC-switchover point are going to be disappointed.
  • iceman16iceman16 Member Posts: 38
    Thanks for the reminder -- here's the link to the performance ESTIMATES. There is no hard data yet.
    http://www.clubtsx.com/bbs/showthread.php?s=&threadid=1137
  • robr2robr2 Member Posts: 8,805
    ...to sit in one last night - satin silver. The most distinguishing feature IMHO was the interior and trunk room.

    Although it is EPA classified as a Compact, I found it to have more space than my 98 Accord listed as a Midsize. In my Accord, I have to set the seat as far back and down as I can. I had to adjust the seat forward at least 2" and raise it up in order to get into a comfortable driving position. I then sat in back with that adjustement and found as much room as in the Accord. The trunk seemed cavernous to me.

    One thing I found/expected is that I was right at home in the driver's seat. The switch positions were all familiar easy to find. It was late and I wasn't able to test drive it.

    The dealer did say they were selling at MSRP and had only 3 presold - all carbon gray. They had in stock 2 autos (silver and black) and 1 stick (blue). He also vaolunteered that the TL is going up a couple of notches in price and features - he said a dramatic departure from the current TL.

    Varmint - the character line is subtle but IMHO noticeable. The doors look very tall - perhaps because there is no body side moulding to break it up. Overall, it has an agressive look.
  • bodble2bodble2 Member Posts: 4,514
    Car & Driver estimated the manual to do a 6.6 sec.
  • nedzelnedzel Member Posts: 787
    Yes, lots of performance for a moderate price and AWD too. Unfortunately, the interior is cheap looking, the content is low, and you are stuck with those stupid frameless windows that are guaranteed to mean more wind noise, particularly as the door seals age. And I'm just not a turbo fan -- I don't like the lag. These days I find that I prefer an engine with lots of low-end torque, rather than a rev-monster.

    The IS300? I was really looking forward to that car. Finally, near BMW performance but with Lexus reliability and service! But I'd have to put up with the styling. Ugh. I can't use the adjective that I'd like to describe those awful tailights. I hate the chronograph instrument panel. The interior in general looks cheap. And the rear seat is very, very small.

    The G35 looked interesting. But I don't like the styling nor the interior, and Infiniti has had a few teething problems with it.
  • jaquinojaquino Member Posts: 90
    Car & Driver's "estimates" seem to be overly optimistic, a 6.6 sec 0-60 on a 4 banger that weighs 3200 lbs is gonna be quite difficult to achieve. To get that kind of time I would imagine the driver would have to drop the clutch at 6000+ rpm or something (hehehehe) on the 6-speed. It will be interesting to see if the actual test drives do actually produce that kind of number, if so that is one amazing engineering feat by the Honda folks.

    I have seen projected speeds for the Auto 5AT model on Club TSX, and it is quite disappointing. I was not expecting a rocket ship, but a 0-60 time of 8.3? I sure hope that projection is wrong, because thats seems awefully slow to me. Sheesh a 1992 Altima 4 banger had a better time of 8.2!
This discussion has been closed.