Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
Acura TSX
This discussion has been closed.
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
The back seat looks pretty roomy too. I like the middle seat headrest, which isn't in the NA car. The only issue I see looking at the picture is that rear headroom is compromised by the sloped "C" pilar and the rear door openings look small.
The side cabin view posted by robertsmx is quite stunning but, if you notice, the rear leg room area is just about front and center in the photo. This suggests that Honda designed the shot in part to show a comfortable rear space and may have moved the front seats up to do so.
I would like to be wrong on this and will wait to see how this all shakes out when the American version is introduced.
I do see the hassle of getting into the car, though, as the lower back door looks pretty tight.
Nissan Altima: 80.4"
Honda Accord: 79.4"
Toyota Camry: 79.4"
Mazda6: 78.8"
Honda Civic: 78.2"
Saab 9-3: 77.4"
VW Passat: 76.8"
BMW 325i: 76.0"
Audi A4: 75.6"
Now, if TSX offered as much space (cabin length) as Honda Civic, it would be middle-pack and handily beat the Saab, VW, BMW and Audi in that regard.
www.clubtsx.com
http://hondanews.com, see under latest news.
The Prelude was always more expensive than an Acura Integra. The Accord V-6 costs as much (or even more) as the Integra/RSX. The Honda S2000 costs more than an Acura CL. Even the Pilot can cost more than the RSX, TL, CL.
I would think TSX will be priced between Accord EX and EXV6 pricing, that would mean, $25K. It could be priced as much as EXV6, or may be a little more, but that should also mean some interesting features and/or serious chassis tuning for performance.
I find it a great idea to have 'another Acura' under Accord V6, because the other Acura is small and has only two doors. It is a sensible model for Acura to have a small sedan to appeal to young buyers and at the same time be within their affordability. IMO, it is better for Honda to launch good products at a reasonable price than overpriced boats for the old people. They have too many choices anyway.
I would imagine that this might play a significant role. From what I can tell, these are going to be cross-shopped heavily: aside from looking very similar, they are both sporty, mid-size sedans with a European flavor. Both will come with a manual, and relatively luxurious appointments.
I don't see this (TSX) competing with BMW or Audi customers.
I can't wait until the comparison drives come out. So far, most journalists really like the Mazda6 for it's better (as compared to current U.S. offerings) handling.
Does anyone else think the TSX looks like a slammed (96-00) Civic? Personally, I initially liked the looks of the TSX but now it's starting to look a little less mature to me. And while part of me likes the looks, I still don't want to have to worry about parts of my car getting ripped off by youth who want to modify their cars.
.
What it basically boils down to is the price and the looks, which is where the Mazda6 might have its advantages.
http://www.honda.co.jp/ACCORD/view/exterior/
Given the good ink the Mazda 6s is getting, I'm inclined to think Acura will have to answer the call with a V6 option. Too bad we won't get the JDM Accord wagon or AWD option.
The IS200 would work better as a Toyota (as it is in the JDM, where Lexus is just a funny word), but it might steal sales from the Corolla/Matrix. Also, given the trouble Toyota has had with 6-spd. trannys and high-winding motors in the Celica GT-S, it's unlikely to appear anytime soon, if ever.
Maybe Toyota will offer something like the IS200 as a top model in their upcoming Scion brand. As a BMW 1-Series fighter, it would fit in just fine.
Besides, Lexus sees itself competeing in a different market than Acura, which is mostly correct.
As for Infiniti, they're going to be busy just keeping up with demand for the G35 sedan and coupe.
diploid,
$22K sounds too low compared to Integra GS-R sedan (~$23K). Acura could offer it for less, but at the expense of standard features. I doubt there will be a stripped model for a low startng price tag. American Accord (LX/LXV6) already cover the $20-23K price range. TSX will likely come in one or two model trims, and as is Acura's practice, NAV being the only option on one or both.
Honda/Acura isn't going to care about volume sales of this car. It may be limited to 30-40K units per year. May be 60K at best, something they can easily meet with fully loaded versions (and it makes sense for a car under premium brand name to come with 'luxury' features.
Perhaps Robert is correct, and the I4 will be a manumatic with the Type S model being the V6 6-speed.
http://www.canadiandriver.com/news/021217-1.htm
I am currently looking to buy a 4 door sporty sedan and will not consider any car with an auto transmission.
I prefer driving my wife's Civic compared to my ML 320 for that reason alone.
If Acura does the same thing with the TSX and only sells the slushbox version, I guess that will make my decision easier- I'll buy the Mazda6. Of course neither car is available in Canada yet so I'll just have to wait.
I'm not saying it's impossible. It's just un-likely.
That Candaian Driver article is dated today and mentions only an i-VTEC engine. The Accord's V6 isn't i-VTEC, it's the older three-rocker system without the "i". I'm thinking this V6 speculation is probably way too premature.
If you looked at the redesigned Civic and CR-V, you wouldn't think they'd engage in the HP wars. But then you have the Odyssey and re-energized MDX to disprove that. They're somewhat inconsistent and I honestly don't see any clear trend that they follow. It's more of a whim on Honda's part to whether go with the flow or not.
Another indication is that it will come with a choice of 5-speed SportShift Auto or 6-speed manual transmission (Honda doesn't offer 6-speed manual transmission in JDM Accord with 2.4 liter engine).
I'm still going with 2.4 liter I-4 with 200 HP/172 lb.-ft, with MSRP of about $25K-$27K with more features than Accord EX/EXV6. Sounds good enough to me.
BTW, TL-S was never available with 6-speed manual. Only CL-S was offered with the choice (which also added helical LSD but eliminated VSA).
Separately, you think those who want rear space from Honda should look at other models. That’s in fact probably what a lot of people would do had Honda not botched the design of the Accord. But things are the way they are and, while no one expects Accord/TL room from the TSX, I have a strong feeling that many potential purchasers out there are hoping that Honda has configured the TSX to provide more interior space than what is available from the bottom of the pack.
Of course, what will count most of all are not the numbers anyway but the way the car feels in person, both in space and performance. Hopefully, we won’t have to wait long to find out.
With these caveats in mind, I believe the following information, obtained from Honda, approximates certain interior dimensions on the European Accord.
The rear hip room on the European Accord appears to be 54.4 inches, which is pretty decent, with the front hip room the same. This measurement seems to be reliable since it measures the length between two fixed points.
Rear legroom on the European Accord, however, appears to be 33.9 inches, which I find pretty disappointing, given what competitors seem to be coming up with. This measurement is less reliable because Europeans measure leg room differently than do Americans, although I believe this measurement does a reasonable job of taking those differences into account. Because of those differences, I have been unable to get a sense of what front legroom is, although pretty much all its potential competitors uniformly provide around 42 inches of front leg room and I see no reason why Honda will do more (or less).
I don't have any information yet on headroom, but may be able to get something on that a little later.
Hope this helps.
And that is just the reason I added front and rear legroom of some cars in the class. Now, if 42" front legroom is desired to start with (and front seat 'adjusted' accordingly), the following provides a good baseline for comparison.
Audi A4: 33.6"
BMW 325: 34"
VW Passat: 34.8"
These might be comparable to TSX, if not better. And TSX might very well be mid-pack given these numbers. Said that, if leg room is a huge issue with a typical TSX buyer, they have Accord or TL to look at. I'm glad to see that TSX is not another jumbo-sized sedan, just right for them who thought American Accord had grown too big.
I don't think the Euro Accord is narrower than the NA Accord. According to Edmunds, the NA Accord's rear hip room is 53.5 inches.
Euro/JDM Accord is about 1.5" narrower than American Accord. However, not all of it should get reflected on the inside. As you mentioned that Euro Accord offers hip-room of 54.4" (front and rear), that sounds impressive compared to American Accord's 54.6"/53.5" (Front/Rear) and Altima's 53.0"/52.7" (Front/Rear).
Consider this possibility: a CVT automatic transmission with manual shifting for up to seven forward ratios, similar to what Honda has done with the CVT on the JDM/European market Fit/Jazz five-door hatchback. JATCO, a Japanese automotive transmission supplier, has begun supplying belt-type CVT's to Nissan for the Murano small SUV; what's to say that JATCO may have made a CVT that works with the Accord/TSX platform?
I think a CVT-equipped Acura TSX could sell quite well, especially since the result could be a quite fast-accelerating car with extremely smooth acceleration and good fuel efficiency.
If Nissan made its 3.5 pretty much ubiquitous, why not Honda?
TSX is likely to get K24A with 200 HP as the only engine choice, may be 190 HP is Acura sticks with Euro-specs. 5 speed auto/Sport Shift or 6-speed manual. That would be good enough.