Acura TSX

uncledavid

and, Honda is already rolling them off the assembly line in Japan in the form of the European Accord Touring. But, there are no rumors that it will be brought over here that I've heard.

markjenn

This is a very cool car, but I'm with the concensus - not likely for the US market. Small wagons have done poorly in the US market unless they can somehow be disguised to look big and tough like SUVs. Traditional small wagons have been very slow sellers (perhaps the P5 is a notable exception) and all the crossover vehicles are just going to make a small market smaller.

- Mark

uncledavid

Yeah, and the European Accord Touring looks kind of frumpy. It isn't like the Audi Avant, where the wagon looks as sporty as the sedan.

markjenn

I'm just giving you a hard time and not cutting you any slack because I'm jealous of your new car. ;-)

I agree, time to move on.

- Mark

phild_mason

OK, I know many here will think me crazy, but I would take a long hard look at the TSX with the diesel that Honda is developing for the European market.

The diesel TSX would be an upscale package that would get great mileage. It would likely have more torque, what really pulls, at the low end.

Volkswagen is going to do a Passat diesel again in the US later this year.

Probably be a cold day before they send it here. Maybe I can get a Euro accord....

stretchsje

I was just catching up on some posts and was reading you're comments of the TSX's ride. You called it busy and unsettled over bumps and rough road.

I thought I'd say that this is true of the Mazda6 too, but it smoothes out at higher speeds. It is most noticable under acceleration, and I'd bet it's inherent to stifly-spring front-wheel-drive cars. Going to lower profile tires actually helped my car- it let the suspension do its job better.

Just thought I'd throw that out there since the cars are so similar. Both have also been critisized for lack of suspension travel, but on the Mazda6 I know that at least mechanically it has as much as its more settled peers.

uncledavid

Is that the Mazda6 with base suspension handles AND rides well. The TSX doesn't offer the option of a base suspension. So, for drivers who really like a smoother ride, the M6 may be a more sensible choice.

stretchsje

well, while I'm glad to hear the positive remark for the M6, my opinion is the opposite: I think the sport package Mazda6 rides better than the non-sport version.

blueguydotcom

I really liked handling of the m6 and the exterior/interior. however the engine was a deal killer for me.

creakid1

"Just thought I'd throw that out there since the cars are so similar. Both have also been critisized for lack of suspension travel, but on the Mazda6 I know that at least mechanically it has as much as its more settled peers."

The TSX is not a lowered Accord, so it doesn't really lack travel. Per June '03 CAR comparison, at least the Euro Accord got better composure cornering over bumps than a softer-riding Mondeo. The TSX doesn't give 'cause the taut setting almost never allows you to use most of its travel, probably not even at fwy speed. An earlier post somewhere had the TSX almost gone airborne over a dip at high speed but didn't point out about the suspension got bangged.

Usually it's the Nissans that are really short on travel. When you pointed out that the new Camry got lots of travel extended when raised on a jack. Well, I don't feel so when COMPRESSING the car downward w/ my own arms. When springs are set softly, the ride height will be low, so the Camry's soft springs may be able to extend very far, it sure doesn't got much capacity(both travel & firmness) left to be compressed, at least less than the old-platform Avalon.

creakid1

Like between the VW Quantum & the Audi 4000. They're only half-brothers, as the rear suspensions are totally different.

The Euro-Accord wagon got trailing-arm rear w/ the gas tank pushed forward & force the rear seat cushion to be raised - hmmm, good result for people like me who hate the TSX sedan's low rear-seating height.

regfootball

TSX Euro Accord wagon is a looker.....even with the huge cargo area.....go the uk media site for Honda and see tons of pics.

stretchsje

Totally disagree with you on that one... that Euro Wagon is ugly. I'll take the Mazda6 wagon, Subie Outback, or a swallow the reliability of a Passat wagon before that dreadful looking thing.

Although, it's totally subjective I guess. Really, I'd rather forget about wagons- give me a well-designed hatchback instead.

rihoops

I'd take a TSX Hatch but I don't think that will happen.

stretchsje

I can dream, can't I?

regfootball

the 6 wagon and TSX wagon are both equally sharp but the Subaru wagon is not a looker in any way. The Euro Accord wagon is one of the best at having a long cargo area, but still looks not as heavy as a Caprice wagon, say.

The 6 wagon is really nicely proportioned. Of course, the fools at Mazda don't have it here yet.

robertsmx

Rear end styling is very similar to Volvo V70... more practicality than style.

Ofcourse in America, people won't buy a wagon if practicality takes over style. It has to be the other way around. That means, we will likely not see TSX Wagon here.

tturedraider

fyi - if anyone wants wood trim to accent their aluminum, i was just on ebay and saw a nice, big (lots of pieces) kit on there for $164/buy-it-now. i was glad to see that, because i like meteor silver/quartz, but don't care for the aluminum trim. this wood kit is a really good compliment. just search "tsx" on ebay motors. there's not much there yet so it should be easy to find. manufactured by sherwood.

btw - i have no personal interest in this item, just passing along info.

sailoverfuel

I do not undertansd why Acura continues to provide such a short supply of TSx'x. I do not see them out in the street.

I undertand the basic Economics Marketing 101 tecnique to shorten supply, create demand to increase prices. But in reallaty these cars do not sell for more than MSRP (there is a Cap/cealing) meaning that Acura could be delivering more cars and selling them at or close to MSRP.

The excuse here in the NJ area is that there was a hail storm somewhere in the South. Who cares...show me the cars. These are not Rolls R. where the manufacturer does no really wanna' see lots of them around (and at Rolls prices-of course this will never happened).

I find it a bit arrogant to treat this model like D' most wanted thing. In reality there are costumers like me that like it and would consider purchasing at MSRP but WILL NOT wait around for months in order to get delivery. A 28K dollar car neds to be in stock or easily accesible...not a special order...wait and fuss as if it was a SUPER Car. Specially when we all know that when the new TL comes out they will be throwing the TSX aroung and forget all this...they will eventually be everywere.

If I have to wait...then I buy another car...after all is just a car and others do compete and offer similar qualities.

All in all, I think Acura would make more money if they would increase suply and stop playing the demand game...there is a cap to the profit per car so there is no use we are not talking Diamonds or Gold here.

sailoverfuel

good to know... I was wondering how long it would take to find after market wood accent kits.

The TSX is really nice inside. Is this a flat Kit. The manufacturers kit does have round parts, front sides- I think. Its nice b/c its not too much not overdoing it and keeps its class.

robr2

Whatever the reason, Honda/Acura said the supply would be 15,000 units for the 2004 model year. I guess they decided they would be happy with that quantity.

What you are seeing now are the effects of people wanting to be the first on the block with the vehicle. Give it a few months and you'll see more supply. One local dealer had at least 6 listed on their web site waiting for homes.

gee35coupe

But here in Atlanta there also seems to be plenty of them around. They've only been out for less than 3 months and they've sold 4 months worth already. As they say in the Mazda6 room,"this ain't no Camcord". Well maybe a Cord...Cept different.

robr2

I'm in Boston. I've seen thus far 2 TSX's on the road since introduction. According to their websites, there are about 40 TSX's in stock at the 5 greater Boston dealers. I know it's a limited production vehicle so the on the road number seems in sync with only 2 months of availablity.

Also, I'm not knocking the TSX. When I get more serious about shopping, I'm planning to look at it.

gee35coupe

And honestly.. I thought it felt "thin". Not enought substance. They don't make cars like they used to. I'm sticking with my slow gas guzzling GS.

sailoverfuel

yeap...I really do not subscribe to that kind of buyer (first in the block) specially with a car that does not stand out that much. If you dont look hard enough and you are not a car lover it goes by and people may think is a TL or Honda (for those that cars are just cars)

On the other han, what atracts me is the nice interiors (fully loaded) with Wood steering wheel, Nav and the works. It feels nice inside and also has details outside l;ike the blinkers in the side rearview mirrors.

So as I expected and as you adviced (since I am happy with my current car and will gladly use it untill lease ends) I will be able to look at them again in the future and it will be a whole new game. Something tells me that they will be in fact below MSRP...just a hunch (6 months to a year from now or when the new TL comes out)

robertsmx

Sailoverfuel

I see your point, but Acura has already sold 64% more TSX than a set pace required to meet 15K units per year goal. The problem may be between over versus under estimating the demand of a compact sport sedan, squeezed between two of its own kind (and more powerful versions: Accord EXV6 and Acura TL) well. Back in 1998, Acura underestimated the demand for newly launched MY1999 TL with plans to move only 40K units per year. A few months later, as wait list grew, the production was bumped up to 60-70K units per year, a pace that the TL maintains today.

Remember Prelude? That car got squeezed by redesigned Accord Coupe (MY1998), and sales dropped to about 10-12K per year. Acura CL sales stayed below expectations as well (about 20K per year). While these numbers are not bad compared to some other automakers, when it comes to Honda, those numbers look thin. Consider that Lexus was marketing IS300 as a 25K units/year car, and it is selling at a slower pace than that. OTOH, Acura marketed TSX as a 15K units/year car, and currently selling at a 25K units/year pace.

This may all be about trying to figure out a balance between over and under estimating sales. Overestimates can mean overstocking, and 0% plus rebates to move them out (hurts any companies bottom line). Underestimates can mean less room for negotiations with the dealer (hurts consumers). Overtime as trend dictates, a middle ground will likely be taken by adjusting import of TSX in greater numbers. This is JIT at work, a way to keep the inventory turnaround low.

BTW, I have seen four TSX on road, two silver, one red and one blue.

blueguydotcom

So as I expected and as you adviced (since I am happy with my current car and will gladly use it untill lease ends) I will be able to look at them again in the future and it will be a whole new game. Something tells me that they will be in fact below MSRP...just a hunch (6 months to a year from now or when the new TL comes out)

You should be able to pick up any acura for well below MSRP. I know in San Diego they dropped 1k off the price before haggling. It's an Acura!

BTW, someone said the CL moved 20k per year? Maybe its first year. All subsequent years sales dropped by 33%. That car was a major bomb.

varmint

"I understand the basic Economics Marketing 101 technique to shorten supply, create demand to increase prices."

I'm sorry, but this makes no sense to me. Honda does not see a dime of the money that dealers charge. Honda sells the cars to the dealer. That is when they stop making money on the deal. If the price is jacked up by market demand, the dealerships make the money.

I understand that this does help Honda in an indirect manner. The resale value of the car is maintained and that contributes to Honda's reputation. Profits also keep Honda dealers happy and it's always good to have happy customers.

But it also creates problems. Customers sure don't like it. They walk to other brands. And lower inventories equal lower market share, which diminishes brand awareness.

In short, the best way for Honda to make money is to make more cars. They cannot increase their profits per car unless they raise the "invoice" price.

So the key to this is being able to balance demand over the long haul. Honda needs to build enough cars to satisfy demand, but not so many that they overproduce. You can't just cut or shut down production with a moments notice. Overproduction leaves you with units that no one wants.

Given the niche-like position that the TSX fills in the Acura lineup, I think 15,000 units is conservative, but still realistic. Right now, it is low, but I doubt demand will keep this pace for more than a single year.

sailoverfuel

"All in all, I think Acura would make more money if they would increase suply and stop playing the demand game...there is a cap to the profit per car so there is no use we are not talking Diamonds or Gold here."

Is what I said....and Vadmit you followed with:

"In short, the best way for Honda to make money is to make more cars. They cannot increase their profits per car unless they raise the "invoice" price."

In essence we agree. I say this b/c technically the manufacturer could raise the invoice price but this is not realistic unless they add value...tangible features to the car. So I do no anticipate a raise in invoice while keeping the same car. you are right.

So I think that if demmand continues the manufacturer will produce more to find this balance.

Robertsmx could not have explained it better---thxs.

Basically...I think that it may be favorable, as price is concerned, for those individuals that can wait 6 months a year or even more to get their TSX.

Finally, the manufacturer may not see more direct money per car sold since thay have an invoice price but it is to their interest to sell in numbers. Volume, specially at the level of TSX where clients pay a premium NOT to see many cars like theirs. At this price range we do not enjoy this benefit-prestige is jus a 27k car. Thats my point).

uncledavid

Here is the issue, the TSX just came out, and nimrods like me rushed to get it. So, right now, it is a hot car and hard to get. Honda is only bringing over 15,000 because they wanted to test the market. If it continues to sell very well, they'll bring over more. Personally, I think a lot of enthusiams for the TSX will die down when the new TL becomes available. I'm guessing it will eventually sell about 20,000 to 25,000 a year like the IS300.

varmint

Sailoverfuel - I'm not clear on what you mean in your last paragraph, but let me post the "why" behind my post and maybe we'll see if we truly are on the same page.

There are many on these boards who believe that Honda/Acura is holding back production because Honda benefits from the higher prices mandated by the dealers. They frequently use references to supply and demand theory to back it up.

That is pretty much hogwash.

When you wrote, "...Honda is playing the demand game", it seemed to me that you were posting along those lines. If not, there is my mistake.

I believe we agree that increasing production to meet demand is the way for Honda to make cash. So why are they not doing it?

To answer that we have to look at production capacity, which brings us to demand in other markets. TSX production is linked to production of the JDM and UK Accord. To produce more of one, they have to cut production on another, or increase total production.

Right now, Honda is struggling in Europe. Even if the car doesn't generate profits, they need to sell Accords other there. They have to establish some market presence. So it is not likely that they will cut production of the UK Accord.

In their home market, Honda sales are stagnant. For the same reasons as the UK, they are unlikely to cut production of JDM Accords.

That leaves them with the option of raising total production. It appears that this is already being done. Sales to date are ahead of the projected 15,000 per year. They could spend more money to enhance the production lines, pay their suppliers over-time, and hire more workers. That should further boost TSX production. However, when the new TL comes and the newness of the TSX wears off, sales will drop. Honda would have to spend even more money to downgrade production back to more realistic levels.

Is it worth all that for a couple thousand more units of a (relatively) low-priced niche vehicle?

uncledavid

every one of your points makes good sense, and I think you have nailed the situation completely.

markjenn

Just a note about how cars are made these days.

Japanese companies are starting to "batch" production of cars. This means that car factories for a given model are not like a continuously running faucet where they can simply open up the spigot and make 10% more if demands picks up. They may make TSX's for the US market only one month, then convert the line over to make something totally different, perhaps not even an Acura.

Also, more and more of a car's final construction consists of bolting together complete sub-assemblies produced in another plant, perhaps across the world. For example, completely dash assemblies are now being produced by suppliers so that a dash production line may make TSX dashes for a week, then be converted over to make dashes for something else, maybe even a Nissan or Toyota, or a even a fancy lawn/garden tractor for that matter.

All this means that demand must be forecast WAY in advance and making instant quick reactions to changes in the market is virtually impossible.

We are not far from where final production of cars is sub-contracting to the degree where the same line may produce a VW Jetta one week and a Honda Accord the next. This is what is now occurring across the board in consumer electronics and most experts think it will occur for cars in the next ten years.

Welcome to the global economy.

- Mark

robertsmx

blueguydotcom
BTW, someone said the CL moved 20k per year? Maybe its first year. All subsequent years sales dropped by 33%. That car was a major bomb.

You are right. Sales numbers from the past for CL:
1999: 21K (first generation)
2000: 24K (first plus second generation)
2001: 19K (second generation)
2002: 12K (second generation)

With the launch of new CL in 2000, Acura made it a more upscale model, and a lot closer to TL. There was no longer the economy option (2.2CL/2.3CL) starting in low-20s. Combine this with increasing sales of TL, an identical car (minus two doors).

Along the similar lines, the move of making RSX a more upscale car than Integra also demanded a reduction in sales estimates. During its peak, Acura may have sold 60-70K Integra units every year, and back then, the stripped RS model was offered, along with LS, GS and GS-R. With the launch of RSX, I saw equivalent of GS as the base RSX, and GS-R as the Type-S. The $18K option, LS was gone as well. This amounts to a car with higher price and reduced sales. But then, Integra did not have to deal with an equivalent version with 4-doors (although LS, GS and GS-R trims were offered with four doors, but still marketed as Integra)

Given these circumstances, CL sales were bound to dip, although not as much as it did in 2002 (but TL sales also fell from all time high 69K to 61K the same year). We can analyze these numbers all day, but the reality, I believe is, that 2-door trims of a car identical in size and performance do not do as well as their 4-door counterparts. I would be eager to know the percentage breakup between BMW 3-series sedan and coupe, since the situation is similar.

parker19

So the wife and I decided to get a TSX to replace our 10 year old car that is breaking down quickly with each passing day.

I had a price range in mind. When the dealer fell 200 short I left and my wife became annoyed saying that I am fighting over peanuts especially when u consider what 200, 500 even a thousand comes out to per month over a 4,5 year period.

She said either you want the car or you don't and a few bucks shouldnt make the difference. We ended up getting the car for 100 less than my original range.

Any thoughts? Is this just a woman being a woman or me being petty and cheap?

midnightcowboy

Think of it a the extra gas cost when you continue on and don't ask directions when you are lost

However, you will probably get a better deal in the long run tenacity pays off.

Actually If you wait until September when the new TLs come out the price of the TSXs will drop much much closer to invoice and actually that is only 3 months away.

Good luck with the boss and with the car stealers <sic, dealers>

ranald

Depends.

If you really want the car, and that dealer is the only one in the area then you're probably being a bit unrealistic ('petty and cheap' would be overstating it a bit, IMO) and your wife seems to have a little more perspective.

If you're interested in the car but buying isn't urgent, or if there are other dealers in the area and you want to comparison shop a little then I think you're being pretty sensible and your wife is being an easy sell.

redkey1

You are just being stubborn at that point.

stretchsje

...then it should've been nothing for the dealer to come down that much.

Who cares what $200 is over 60 months? I care that $200 is a day skiing with the wife, or a 7-day pass to Disney World, or my first 125 gallons of gas free. That's not stubborn. That's setting a "worth" in your mind and sticking to it. If it's not worth giving up a ski trip to get the car....

That's eating Chipotle (good lunch) free for a month. That's free cable for 6 months. That's oil changes for half of the car's life. Heck, that's one big night in a strip club, if that's your thing... $200 is a lot! Putting it in the context of a $25k-$30k purchase doesn't make the $200 any less important than $200 saved on a $201 purchase.

phild_mason

I don't know what all you were negotiating with Parker, but how about getting closer by having some accessories thrown in. Dealers can be willing to do that.

jim_loves_cars

if you really want the car. The house always wins, especially when they hold all the cards. And with the popularity of the TSX, these Acura dealers are sitting pretty. I give you credit for sticking to your guns and getting them to meet you half way.

In the end, it whether or not you really want the car. If you really like it, it's worth the extra $200 (or more even)- what the hell, right? If you feel you're beyond your comfort zone regarding what you want to pay for the car and the TSX doesn't do anything special for you, then $200 is a great excuse to walk away.

It's a litmus test of sorts.

-jim

venus537

i don't follow the logic that says the tsx will be cheaper to buy (hopes it's true though) once the tl is available, especially if honda doesn't increase production. they are two different kind of cars. the TL will still be more luxury than sport. it will be interesting to see how much further RL sales diminish once the new TL is available.

in the long run, i think the tsx will still be the more appealing car.

parker: what what your price range? how much below sticker did you get the car for?

gee35coupe

What in the world is that car still doing around?

markjenn

When negotiating a purchase, never think of money as sone percent of the total amount or some $/month figure. $200 spends the same whether you get a $300 stereo for $100 or a $102,000 car for $101,800. If you think you can get the $200 by negotiating another 30-minutes, then you just made $400/hour, which is significant in most people's scheme of things.

This philosophy has nothing to do with being cheap or petty. If you get good service from someone, then spend the little extra for that service - consider it a tip if you want. Likewise, if you need the car and the best you can do is $200 more than you planned on spending, then for heaven's sake, spend the $200. There are lots of examples of people walking away from a purchase to try and get the last dollar out of a deal and ending up not getting anything. Do the best you can do but don't try and do better.

And don't focus on the "deal". Some cars are good values at MSRP and some aren't. I see a lot of posts where people say, "I'm never going to spend more than $200 over invoice on any car." That's the kind of attitude that gets you a Chevy Cavalier at $200 over invoice, which is a good deal but a poor value.

- Mark

varmint

"If $200 is so rediculous, then it should've been nothing for the dealer to come down that much."

I agree with Stretchsje on this one. Money is money. And Markjenn gives some excellent advice on deal vs value.

It might be worth your time to go back and tell the sales person that you want the car, you will pay the price, but if you have to pay those $200 you will not be a happy customer, and you will not recommend them.

On the other hand, if they do take the hit, they will have a happy customer who is willing to be positive with the after sale survey, recommend them to friends, and deal with them for service (assuming you are in fact willing to do all that).

Essentially, you give them the choice of picking the carrot or the stick.

redkey1

"I had a price range in mind. When the dealer fell 200 short I left and my wife became annoyed ..."

"...We ended up getting the car for 100 less than my original range."

So, if my math is right you were fighting over $200 even though you were in your desired range? Then I would say you are being petty. While I agree that $200 is $200, if you are arguing for $200 to get a $100 vs $300 over invoice deal it is ridiculous to get up and leave the deal on the table. How much is your time worth? If you had to go to another dealer and re-work the deal (with no guarantee that you'd get it) you are taking up time, which to me is valuable. $200 is worth it to not have to spend an entire weekend driving all over the state, wrestling with dealers. For $1000, maybe. To me, time is money.

BTW, what kind of deal did you end up getting?

parker19

I never realized $200 would bring out so many opinions or is it because I mentioned my wife.

I got the car at $500 off sticker which from reading this board seems to be roughly the going rate give or take a few bucks. Of course, after reading some of these posts, I thought I could get more off. It was probably more about ego than what I could affort to get as much off as possible but like the last post said, after a while it got old scanning the globe to try to save a few extra bucks.

robr2

I believe what auto mfrs are striving for is the complete opposite of what you stated. Mfrs want to build multiple vehicles on the same line with no delay in changeover. Honda already makes RH and LH drive vehicles on the same lines without delay.

I find it hard to believe that Japanese companies are reverting back to batch processing after spending decades developing kaizan (pull demand) and SMED (single minute exchange of dies) techniques. Factories need to flexible and lean so they can respond to demand almost instantly. Building what they can and stockpiling is not lean.

Yes subassemblies are typically built by a supplier and they may be located 10 miles away or around the world, but they are required to be lean as well and be ready to make what the factory needs and deliver it in the sequence and timeframe required.

jay108

$200 aint much these days. I personally need to adjust my concept of the value of money. I still think anything over 20,000 is alot, but in reality, I should change my opinion to anything over $35,000 or $40,000.
I would say TSX is a pretty good value priced as is.

Having a happy wife may be the greatest value of all.

viper0074

Wife happy ... Life happy ...

Congrats on your purchase. It's a nice car.

Peter