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
The A4, while having 30 less hp than the TSX, felt torqier at low to mid rpms, probably due to actually more torque (166 ft-lbs) being available from 1950 rpm on up--equal to the torque PEAK of the TSX. The TSX IS quicker 0-60 though as the A4 runs out of steam above 6000 rpm.
If you really like the A4's interior better, drive a frontrack again before buying. I'd bet you could get one equipped similarly to a TSX for only a few hundred more (sport, premium, xenons). I haven't compared the two cars back-to-back but I believe them to be very close. Both are great values. I agree that Honda has better reliability rep than Audi and other European makes though.
If you are leasing, keep in mind the BMWs have better (or at the very least equal) depreciation making the leases comparable.
Can you please explain the "translation"?
regard,
kyfdx
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
I estimated 15% drivetrain loss.
The numbers appear to suggest that the crank rating of peak torque may be 172 lb.-ft (as in Japan) with the same peak power (200 HP).
As far as quick drop off of torque at higher rpm is concerned, the evidence is in the power output. Between 6000 and 6800 rpm, the power gain is only 15 HP, so it is a wider power curve instead of a higher power curve. With slightly more torque at high engine speed, the engine could have an additional 10-20 HP.
The BMW 325i with only 184hp and 175lbs-ft of torque can do 0-60mph in 7 seconds flat. Can the TSX beat this time? I don't think so. See MotorWeek's review.
And what if it does in another? One road test does not tell everything. I have seen 7.4s for 325 in some tests, and 6.9s in others, so there will be variances. TSX has the potential to make the run in 6.8-7.0 s. That said, I would be interested in two performance numbers measured: 0-40 and 5-60.
The A4, while having 30 less hp than the TSX, felt torqier at low to mid rpms, probably due to actually more torque (166 ft-lbs) being available from 1950 rpm on up--equal to the torque PEAK of the TSX.
Was this a manual-to-manual comparison, or auto-to-auto? With manual, TSX should feel torquier because the gearing is tighter and torque output is not too far apart. With automatic, Acura was less aggressive in terms of gearing, possibly to get better ‘mileage’ results. Acura should have used a little more aggressive gearing (as it does in RSX) with the auto.
But then, I have seen people complain about high revs and need for tall gearing, so I guess that part is addressed with the auto.
The Audi and BMW also come with free scheduled maintenance for 48 months/50,000 miles.
What is the cost of maintenance over the time? What is covered?
My A4 - TSX comparison was with MT's. A4 is geared pretty low in 1st also and it was my subjective "feel" while driving it. Didn't do any 0-40 timed sprints with salesman in car.
Maintenance for Audis is just basic oil/filters/checkups every 10K miles for first 50K--nothing that should be the deciding factor for someone on the fence. Warranty covers everything except tires. Bigger incentive is the 1.9% financing they're offering. Be nice if Acura matched that (just trying to help you guys out here)=D
As for the A4, I drove it extensively. I did not find it one bit more fun to drive, and disagree with the suggestion that it has more torque in the middle. Also, the power delivery in the TSX is more linear (no turbo lag). Overall, I think you'll see similar levels of acceleration in the two vehicles. I think the A4 has a slightly nicer interior, and the ride is better.
My take on the TSX: It will not accelerate, handle, or ride nearly as well as the BMW. It doensn't have as nice an interior as the A4. The A4 also has a certain European charm that the TSX will never match (my totally subjective impression). But, the TSX will offer many of the advantages of both those vehicles, with Honda's reliablity and low upkeep.
The TSX is a car you can purchase and keep for 10 years (as I did with my Accord Cpe EX). The A4 and BMW are cars you lease, and walk away from before they become liabilities.
Here is the dyno on TSX mentioned earlier.
Not really. While the up front costs are higher, there are maintenance costs only after the first 50k. For the first 50k it costs - zip - to maintain. Obviously, though the maintenance is priced in.
I realize this is the TSX forum, but I was so hot on that car. I liked it more than the A4, 9-3 but then I drove the BMW.
While the cars are relatively trouble free, when you do go in for scheduled maintenance they try to hit you for a lot. Even worse is that the dealer where I bought my honda makes you wait on line for 6 hours to get in the shop -- then wait 6 hours for your oil to be changed.
The pricing of their service is definitely on the high side, unfortunately. It's pretty similar to what the Mercedes-Benz and Lexus dealerships charge around here, though perhaps a few percent lower. Just going from the Honda label to the Acura one seems to make them think they can charge significantly more for their services. To be fair, this dealership is located in the most upscale area of all the Acura dealerships around here.
My comment about the "severe conditions" maintenance schedule does require some thought. The manual lists conditions that happen to everyone -- stop-and-go with a lot of idling, severe weather, frequent short trips, etc. But the key is that the manuals says that you drive mostly under those conditions, as opposed to just occasionally (who doesn't hit stop-and-go traffic at least once in a while nowadays?).
Some of the Acura dealerships try to push you into the severe maintenance schedule by saying, "well, you know traffic is bad here, so you do stop-and-go, so you should go to the severe schedule." That basically makes service visits every 3,750 miles instead of 7,500, and makes the annual services significantly more expensive.
Of course, if one does their own basic maintenance or has it done outside of the dealership, you can cut your costs. Realistically, the old-fashioned idea of changing your oil every 3k miles is dated.
http://www.hoehnacura.com
They could give you the p/n, or you could just order some filters from them.
I'd be willing to bet the TSX uses the same filter that the Accord uses, in which case you could get a good deal on them at
http://www.manchesterhonda.com
They're good guys, too.
I think so, too. Maybe that's why Acura dealers can't afford to release the part #, especially when Fram's already got them.
When I had an Acura Integra GSR and wanted factory service I usually went to the Honda dealer and the price was about 1/2. Acura charge a lot for the free loaner car
That's why the old Audi A4 and current VW Passat 2.8V6 is so good when it comes to helping the car achieve balanced handling. It has 190 hp and 206 lb. ft of torque...a little low compared to Altima, Accord, and the Camry's new VVT-i V6, but compared to those three cars, there's no torque steer, and the engine is still quite quiet. Just my 0.02
That said, if V6 is a must have, one should get Accord V6 for less, or TL for a little more than TSX. Options are available from Honda/Acura anyway.
TSX w/V6 would be atleast 100 lb heavier, and $2K more expensive (unless Acura decided to strip off some standard features). In other words, a car like the TL for the same price.
(1)I may have missed it in all the postings, but has anyone seen figures on how many feet the TSX takes to brake from 60 to 0? I saw in CR that the Accord EX V6 took about 146', which is a bit long - does the TSX use the same brakes and have a similar stopping distance?
(2) I've always stayed away from black seats because they were so unbearable in the summer, but the TSX black interiors look best to me. Does the perforated leather and what Acura calls "heat rejecting" tinted glass make a significant difference?
But, in answer to your question, my car hasn't seemed to get too hot inside. The tinted glass helps. The moonroof tilts up,and you leave it open a crack to let hot air out in the summer. It hasn't been very hot out here (I live in Los Angeles) yet, although sunny all the time.
I've never had leather seats in a car before. But, my guess is that the perforated seats don't help that much. The seats are designed to give you support in sharp turns. All that bolstering on the sides prevents too much airflow to your back.
I was just curious if anyone was able to uninstall the splash guards and cover up the holes that would leave in the wheel/fender area. I plan to unistall mine if they do come installed from Japan on the TSX.
I have seen TSXs with and without splash guards and think that the ones without look much more classy and appealing. You never see BMWs or MBs with splash guards. I don't want them on my TSX.
Please help me if you know anything about this. Thanks.
M
Oh well. Just make sure you get the dealer to throw it all in at deal time.
By the way, I have driven the G35 -- if it's OOMPH you're looking for, then you will NOT be disappointed with the G35 -- it ROCKS!
Note, however, the G35 will not hold its value as well as an Acura, there will be a substantial gas mileage difference from a 4-cyl to a 6-cyl, but given the G35 is rear-wheel drive, it does perform better for the enthusiest.
Also, I believe both the TSX and the G35 require premium fuel (but I could be wrong) and believe the reviews I've read indicate the TSX has a nicer interior -- but again, have not tested a TSX myself yet.
The interior is a lot nicer on the TSX, but the power and torque down low is not in the same league as the G35.
I love the g35 but something tells me after the luster wears off of how great this car drives I would be happier with an easier to maintain acura
Its hard to say. Infiniti builds a very reliable vehicle and the VQ series of engines is proven. Infiniti dealers also offer better service than Acura (Acura dealers don't always offer loaner cars, for example). The handling and acceleration are great on the G35 and I lovethe exterior looks.
In the end, I decided not to get the G35 because I hated the interior. The materials seem cheap, and there are losts of ergonomic gotchas (but again, this is my opinion only, many others like the interior on the Infiniti).
Acura is only bring over 15,000 TSXs this year. I'm sure the resale vale will be excellent. It should be reliable as hell. IMO, it is a much more comfortable car and the interior is really, really nice. It handles extremely well for a FWD but I find the ride to be a little on the harsh side (others may disagree). I know it has a four-banger, but the acceleration and power around town seem more than adequate.
The Acura is a lot cheaper, true. But, Infinitis can be had for decent discounts and you do get a larger more powerful car if you go with the G35. So, I don't think the Acura is a better VALUE - just less expensive overall.
In the end, I went for the Acura because I liked the interior a lot better, and have had nothing but good experiences with Honda products. But, the G35 might offer more bang for the buck. If acceleration and power are more important to you than interior comfort and fit-and-finish, the Infiniti is definitely the better way to go.
I distinctly noted that some of the materials employed within its interior, could be improved upon, which essentially means that the developmental dollars of that vehicle, went to developing its RWD drivetrain. The car is rated as a bargain for what it is sold at.
Later...AH
As for the interior, I don't like it but others do. It could be argued that materials on the inside are low quality, but some Infiniti ownwers would not agree. In the end, even that is a question of personal tastes.
Later...AH