Acura TSX vs Lexus IS 250



  • chikoochikoo Member Posts: 3,008
    >>>Volvo's ride is very good (turbo makes it a formidable car), but I couldn't get past the fact that it shares a lot in common with the Mazda 3.<<<

    The Mazda3 is one of the best cars out there, dollar for dollar. Fantastic build quality, as good as any Acura or Lexus. The 2.3L engine is one of the best powerplants out there in this world. It has even been chosen as the choice to power the Champ Car atlantic championship - Beginning in 2006, all Atlantic cars will be powered by a 300-hp 2.3-liter four-cylinder Mazda MZR engine.
  • speedracer3speedracer3 Member Posts: 650
    So in conclusion:

    1) There is no technological advantage of the IS vs. the TSX- aside from those subjectives going on in z71bill's head

    2) The Honda Civic is not a entry level luxury car, but a fine economy car.

    3)Buy what you like, enjoy it and let others do the same.
  • biker4biker4 Member Posts: 746
    You made one other mistake: in Europe the Accord went on sale March 2003, right after the Geneva auto show. Outside of NA, few cars have model years.

    Biker, who used to attend the Geneva auto show every year.
  • verticalvertical Member Posts: 12
    Good point. Mazda3 has received a lot of accolades.

    I don't agree with the view expressed in this forum that "it all comes down to money/price". If you start analyzing performance per dollar or feature per dollar, there is no end. I bought the 06 TSX over others because I liked the car.
  • lexus_jnlexus_jn Member Posts: 102
    "There is no technological advantage of the IS vs. the TSX- aside from those subjectives going on in z71bill's head "

    Enjoy your TSX but please keep in mind that it's not the same class/caliber as IS. No need for comparison..IS owners would not want to compare theirs to TSX's because they know what TSX should be compared to. fair enough?
  • johnny420johnny420 Member Posts: 473
    IS owners would not want to compare theirs to TSX's because they know what TSX should be compared to. fair enough?

    And what would the Lexus be competing against? The BMW 3 series? If that's the case, I'm afraid the Bimmer hammers it, at least with regards to driving dynamics.

    And if the TSX shouldn't be compared to the IS250, what should it be compared to? Sure, the IS comes in at a different price point, but I think the point is that the TSX still compares favorably to the IS when it comes to the driving experience. Many would argue that it's better.

  • lexus_jnlexus_jn Member Posts: 102
    "And what would the Lexus be competing against? The BMW 3 series? If that's the case, I'm afraid the Bimmer hammers it, at least with regards to driving dynamics."

    Driving dynamics is not the only factor to determine BMW is a better car. performance, luxury, styling, solid quality/reliability put IS ahead of 3-series.

    "And if the TSX shouldn't be compared to the IS250"

    I guess it would waste my time to convince you but I think you should compare TSX to 325i. In all fairness, I think it's still better than the Bimmer, at least with regards to value and reliability. You love TSX and believe it is better than IS...fine with me. :-)
  • lexus_jnlexus_jn Member Posts: 102
    I don't think it's neccessary because IS is more expensive and like I've said they are not in the same class. However, if do you want to compare TSX and IS, here is the comparison data from JD Power Associates.

    Overall quality: TSX (3 star) IS (5 star)
    Mechanical : TSX (3 star) IS (5 star)
    Body & interior
    quality : TSX (2 star) IS (4 star)

    Features: TSX (5 star) IS (5 star)
    Overall Appeal : TSX (3 star) IS (5 star)
    Performance TSX (2 star) IS (5 star)
    Comfort TSX (3 star) IS (5 star)
    Style TSX (2 star) IS (3 star)
  • johnny420johnny420 Member Posts: 473
    You love TSX and believe it is better than IS...fine with me.

    I didn't say that. I've never driven an IS. I'm simply providing fodder for discussion. I just know that the TSX drives a lot better than numbers might suggest. I've been arguing this point for a couple of years now, my words often falling on deaf ears. Other TSX owners no what I'm talking about, though.

    True, driving dynamics aren't the only criteria for cars, but, for many of us, it's a heavily weighted factor. Every marque has its dedicated followers; BMW, Lexus and Acura are no different in that regard.

    Regarding the performance ratings you listed for TSX/IS, I'd be willing to bet that straight line performance slants that rating in the IS's favor.

    BTW, I think the IS is a terrific looking car. I just have a feeling that the driving experience would be a little isolating for my tastes. :shades:
  • 151ranch151ranch Member Posts: 109
    Ummm, your link is a bit misleading - if you read how JDPower gets those stats, they merely copied the 2005 IS ratings over to the 2006. They won't publish the new IS ratings from owners until August. The old IS, while still a nice car, was really blah to drive. To give the old IS a 5 star performance rating is extremely suspect, IMO.

    I liked the new IS - but I only drive MTs, and the shifter in the IS was horrible.
  • speedracer3speedracer3 Member Posts: 650
    The same people that say that reviews don't matter, only quote reviews that describe their cars in a positive light. If you look hard enough even the worst car in the world will have a nice review. So if you shop for cars based on stars on JDPower's web site or Motor Trend awards you'll pay close attention. I personally worry more about getting in that driver's seat and driving.
  • z71billz71bill Member Posts: 1,986
    Since the TSX is a 4 door - 4 banger - front wheel drive that is 183 inches long, 69 inches wide, 57 inches tall and has a wheel base of 105 inches how about comparing it to -

    A 4 door - 4 banger - front wheel drive that is 177 inches long, 69 inches wide, 57 inches tall and has a wheel base of 106 inches - (That would be the 2006 Honda CIVIC)
  • lexus_jnlexus_jn Member Posts: 102
    dude, I said TSX should not be compared to IS because they don't seem to fall into the same price range. I posted the link/data from JDP with a purpose to enlighten some folks who intentionally believed TSX is really superb as compared to others. I do like Acura brand and TSX model (my cousin drives one) is a good car that you can get for your money.

    Just like you , my purchasing decision for a car is not based solely on data from JPD and CR. However, they are for sure two of the most trusted sources you can reference to if needed.
  • lexus_jnlexus_jn Member Posts: 102
    "BTW, I think the IS is a terrific looking car. I just have a feeling that the driving experience would be a little isolating for my tastes"

    Try IS whenever you have a chance. It's one heck of a car and have an average of 10 days stay on the dealer lot. TSX is also on the list of top 25 hottest selling models. -
  • speedracer3speedracer3 Member Posts: 650
    What should compare the TSX to? about other entry level or near luxury sedans. Here are a few choices:

    1) Audi A3/A4
    2) BMW 325i
    3) Lexus IS 250
    4) Volvo S40
    5) Honda Accord V6 (yes, many cross shopped it)
    6) VW Passat

    You can quote measurements and displacements all day long the fact is that the Honda Civic is not the same class or price range as the TSX. I don't think anybody here that shopped for a luxury sedan even considered the Civic, me included. I am gonna say it again, the Honda Civic is an ECONOMY car, not a LUXURY sedan.... and I am starting to think you don't know the difference between the two.
  • fedlawmanfedlawman Member Posts: 3,118
    Since the IS250 is a 4 door - V6 that is 180 inches long, 71 inches wide, weighs 3450 lbs and has a wheel base of 107 inches how about comparing it to -

    A 4 door - V6 that is 181 inches long, 71 inches wide, weighs 3550 lbs and has a wheel base of 105 inches - (That would be the 2006 Toyota RAV4)

    EDIT - Oops, my bad. These cars don't compare after all. I just learned that the RAV4 has more cargo and passenger room, 65 more HP, and costs $8,000 less!
  • speedracer3speedracer3 Member Posts: 650
    Good point fedlawman, why buy the IS 250 when you can get a Toyota RAV4?. Z71bill's logic is starting to make sense now. :P
  • johnny420johnny420 Member Posts: 473
  • johnny420johnny420 Member Posts: 473
    johnny420's take on z71bill's take on the TSX:

    The TSX is NO DIFFERENT than the CIVIC, and Honda as A cAR COMpany DOESN'T know what it's DOING BECAUSE it sees FIT to release TWO CARS priced about $8000 apart which are, IN FACT, exactly the SAME!

    FURTHERMORE, contrary to overwhelming OPINION, the TSX's handling is HORRIBLE!

    If you TSX OWNERS knew what was GOOD for you, you'd ALL trade your TSX's in and go buy CIVICS!

    Caps lock mania, baby! :P
  • ctalkctalk Member Posts: 646
    1) Audi A3/A4
    2) BMW 325i
    3) Lexus IS 250
    4) Volvo S40
    5) Honda Accord V6 (yes, many cross shopped it)
    6) VW Passat

    The Honda Accord V6 6SPEED actually beat the TSX in a comparison test done by C&D :surprise: :P

    But it stated in the comparison with more power the TSX would have been placed higher.
  • z71billz71bill Member Posts: 1,986
    Rav4 is an SUV not a sedan - But guess what - it most likely rides/handles better than the TSX!

    I would have said compare the TSX to the 2002 European ACCORD - but that would be comparing it to itself!

    I drove both (Civic and TSX) they really are about the same size - they have about the same ride quality - the Civic does handle better - sure its $8,000 less - but that is the point - WHY DOES AN ECONOMY CAR THAT IS $8,000 LESS HANDLE BETTER THAN THE TSX (I think its because its 2006 technology - not 2002 technology!).

    IMO - it takes more than the ACURA name to make it a luxury car - I would say the same thing about Lexus or BWM -

    But just for fun -

    Rank Lexus, BMW, Audi and Acura from most to least as a luxury/sport brand.

    We may not all agree on the exact ranking - but NO ONE will put Acura FIRST - MOST (all the honest people) will put it LAST.

    Its like when GM put a Caddy badge (and leather seats!) on the Chevy Cav - did that make it a LUXURY car?

    Thats exactly what Honda has done - its called badge engineering - maybe you all could just go to a junk yard - but an ACURA badge off a wrecked car - glue it on a Honda Civic - get after market leather and save $7,500!
  • johnny420johnny420 Member Posts: 473
    See, now you're just repeating yourself. Do you derive pleasure from posting idiotic comments like the Rav4 "most likely rides/handles better than the TSX?"

    All this freakin' trolling and you drive a MAZDA3!!! Is that true?! Holy smokes, dude!

    Bill H = zero cred
  • fedlawmanfedlawman Member Posts: 3,118
    "Rav4 is an SUV not a sedan."

    I'm not going to get into a "what is a car and what is a truck/SUV" discussion here. Suffice it to say that the RAV4 has Macpherson strut suspension up front and wishbones in the rear (just like the new Civic!). If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...

    "I drove both (Civic and TSX) they really are about the same size..."

    Sorry Bill, but you really lose credibility here. I test drove the new Civic EX and there's no comparison. The Civic feels lighter on it's feet than the TSX (it does weigh 500 lbs. less!), but less planted to the ground too (it's skittish over rough road surfaces). The Civic rides smooth for an economy car, but it rolls hard in corners, and it definitely transmits more noise and vibration into the cockpit compared to the TSX - nowhere near the refinement of the TSX.

    Civic interior materials aren't the same level of quality as the TSX, and it lacks many amenities that the TSX offers - not the least of which is a 200+ HP 2.4L powerplant. The Civic makes do with a 1.8L, 140 hp engine (60 fewer HP!) that significantly lags behind the TSX in both high RPM thrust and low RPM grunt.

    "WHY DOES AN ECONOMY CAR...HANDLE BETTER THAN THE TSX (I think it's because it's 2006 technology - not 2002 technology!)."

    Could you detail the 2006 technology the Civic possesses?

    The Civic may feel better to an average driver because it's lighter, but it definitely does not "handle better" than the TSX. The TSX's "2002 technology" double wishbone suspension up front and multi-link setup in the rear is light years ahead of the Civic's (old-tech) Macherson struts.

    I think you need to go to driving school if you didn't notice the TSX's larger brakes, wider tires, fully independant suspension, and +60 HP and TQ.

    Now can we get back on topic and discuss the TSX and IS250?
  • speedracer3speedracer3 Member Posts: 650
    This weekend I went a along with a friend of mine who was shopping for a small car and the Civic was on her list. So I asked to drive it, to see if z71bill had a leg to stand on. All I have to say to z71bill is "say no to drugs". Mind you the Civic is a fine little economy car. But it doesn't compare to the TSX in ANYTHING. Let's start by the obvious, the car has a 1.8L 140hp engine. Can you say underpowered and loud??. The car has no guts, it's made to be fuel efficient, not sporty or remotely fast. The ride is floaty, the car rolls like a canoe on turns and there is nothing special about the ride. The TSX rides more sporty and it is way more refined than the Civic. It's like comparing a Caddy to a Yugo. Cheap- yeap, from the car seats to the overall feel, the Civic looks an feels cheap. The TSX on the other hand, looks and feels a lot more pricey than it's $27K price tag. So as the old adage says "you get what you pay for", and in this case it is true. Nobody here, me included, would EVER consider a Civic as an alternative to a TSX. So, please z71bill go troll somewhere else, you've wasted enough time with your nonsense, let's get back to TSX vs. IS 250.
  • jeepdriver2jeepdriver2 Member Posts: 5
  • patpat Member Posts: 10,421
    We're comparing the TSX and the IS 250 here. If you want to talk about other comparisons, check out the list at this link: Comparisons - Sedans vs. Sedans. Feel free to start up another if you don't find one that suits you.
  • z71billz71bill Member Posts: 1,986
    Since anything I post seems to disappear its hard to respond - but if this thread is restricted to TSX vs IS only then it is time to move on - since everything has already been said.

    To sum it all up -

    The IS beats the TSX in every category except price - so if you want the best car get the IS - want to save some money get the TSX.
  • mvc_jonesmvc_jones Member Posts: 88
    As it appears the TSX does have some things that the IS does not (split folding rear seat, FWD vs. RWD, which is a preference, more rear seat room, I think) (and likewise the IS has some things the TSX does not, i.e power (IS350 largely), RWD vs. FWD, bells and whistles, etc...) I think the superior car is much a matter of preference and perspective, not solely price vs. 'category wins' (which are not as absolute as you state.)

    Certainly someone wanting an entry luxury performance sedan in Minnesota may opt for the TSX as the superior choice, regardless of price, as opposed to someone in Southern CA, who may opt for the IS as the superior choice.

    Your logic and statement offers no context of what one wants vs. prefers, so saying that the IS beats the TSX in every category except price is single minded and does not take into account preference, locale, context in terms of 'who wins'.

    With your logic of price vs. your personal definition of preference, then I assume any auto of any cost and with RWD and decent handling, wins this contest your are running. I think this is simple-minded and defeats the point of discussing broadly defined merits and disadvantages, discounting anything except a narrow definition of perfomance, price, utility and convenience be damned.

    Of course, just looking at 2 cars is pretty narrow to start with...
  • z71billz71bill Member Posts: 1,986
    I finally understand why some like the TSX better - I think it was the last post from mvc_jones that helped me see the light!

    My first thought was - lets start a thread that compares the TSX to the 4 cylinder / front wheel sport sedans from BMW, MB and Lexus - broaden the discussion - then I realized - BWM, MB and Lexus do not have any 4 cylinder front wheel drive sport sedans - that got me to thinking - why not? (I won't try and explain the OBVIOUS)

    Ever wonder why almost EVERY economy car uses a 4 cylinder front wheel drive layout? (again I won't try and explain the OBVIOUS)

    Then the post about the TSX having fold down rear seats and it all became clear!

    The things that would be TOP priorities in a sports sedan would be ride quality - handling - engine performance & brakes - not sure where the fold down rear seat would come in - but it would not be in the top 10. Not that this is a bad feature - just not that vital of a feature on a sport sedan.

    So it seems like the problem here is I am trying to find a REAL sports sedan - a car that has a good ride quality (firm - but not harsh) great handling - snappy engine - great brakes (stopping power and pedal feel) because that is what I want / expect in a sports sedan.

    It appears that most of the people who buy the TSX are not really interested in a true sports sedan - what they really want is a car that is practical with a little bit of sporty thrown in - like a sporty Accord - but not an Accord. This is - after all - the exact customer the Acura TSX was designed to target. The person who wants all the things offered in an Accord - but - for what ever reason will not buy an Accord - maybe they want/ can afford something a little bit nicer - and don't like to drive the same EXACT car as the other million or so people who have an Accord.

    So just to be clear - there is nothing wrong with the TSX - really - it is a fine car - good balance between the practical features of the econony car it is based on - while still having (to some anyway) the brand image that it is more than an every day run of the mill family econo box. The argument here is really is the TSX more like an Accord (family friendly economy car)- or more like a BMW 325i (true sports sedan). I think its more like the Accord - most of the TSX owners think it is more like a BMW 325i.

    Hows that for having an open mind!
  • speedracer3speedracer3 Member Posts: 650
    I don't think that my TSX is like a BMW 325i. Yet you are partly right, I am not looking for a true sport sedan. I have always said that if I wanted a true sport sedan I would buy a BMW 3 because it has always been the benchmark of what a sport sedan should be. After all the Infiniti G35 & The Lexus IS are all attempts to dethrone the BMW 3 series. Mind you, I don't think that the IS 250 is a true sport sedan either, since from what I've read it's just not sporty enough. It makes sense, Toyota is not known for it's sporty offerings in this country. The last serious (not whimpy Celicas or MR2s) sport's car Toyota made was the Supra and that was gone by the late 80's, and the last attempt at sport sedan was the previous IS, which left a lot to be desired. Having said all that, I think that the IS and TSX compete well because they are both "sporty" and luxurious. I don't see the HUGE difference between the two to warrant paying more for the Lexus.
  • hondakidhondakid Member Posts: 17
    Folks, I am an 04 TSX owner. Bought mine the 1st month they were made available (May 03).

    Test drove the Bimmer, Audi, VW, etc. Finally drove the Manual AND Auto TSX. Fell in love with the Manual! Bought it. Have loved it More and More over the years. I have NO regrets with it. Sure, like ANY vehicle, it has some shortcomings. But then again, so will and does the IS (250/350) ... !

    What surprises me is that this thread has been reduced to comparing a TSX to a Civic.

    The TSX is an entry level sports sedan. There is NO debate here. This is a fact.

    Shame on US TSX owners for NOT quashing the Civic comparison the moment it was brought up!

    If you own a TSX ... be proud. I AM!

    If I were to buy today, I would still go with the TSX. PRICE is NOT the issue. I LIKE THE TSX. NOT THE IS.

    The IS is most likely a fine vehicle. BUT NO ONE has the right to come here and stomp on the TSX because of their negative SUBJECTIVE experience with it.

    Compare all the "Like" cars to the TSX .... talk about the PROS and CONS, but don't you dare denigrate it with bringing up an EconoBox. That's were you lose ALL credibility.

    The End!
  • z71billz71bill Member Posts: 1,986
    You say "The TSX is an entry level sports sedan. There is NO debate here"

    I would say that is subjective - please give me your objective criteria for what makes a car a sports sedan.

    Most (BMW, MB & Lexus for example) would say - rear wheel drive and at least a V6 under the hood are the bare minimum for entry into the sport sedan club. Since the TSX does not have either of these I would say the burden to provide objective proof that the TSX is worthy to be considered a luxurt sport sedan is on you.

    BTW - just to clear things up - I did say the TSX has about the same ride quality as a 2006 Civic - I also said the Civic has better handling - both based on my back to back test drives on the same road. I never said the Civic was a luxury sport sedan - or that it is in the same class as the TSX. I also stated the TSX has more engine power.

    Maybe I was wrong about this thread being done - its kind of like an old tube of tooth paste - if we try hard enough we can squeeze a little more out of it!
  • speedracer3speedracer3 Member Posts: 650
    V6 and RWD is what makes a sport sedan?. Well go drive a Audi 2.0T, it is neither RWD nor a V6 and it will likely outhandle the Lexus IS 250. BTW...I drove the Honda Civic, it does not handle better than the TSX, not even close. I suggest you drive a Civic and a TSX back to back and take a hard corner. One car will roll one will not. Hint: It won't be the TSX.
  • devore420devore420 Member Posts: 30
    Okay hang on, I find the statement that the Civic handles and rides better than the TSX extremely difficult to believe, despite you saying you did these test drives back to back on the same road.

    I've been driving an 01 Civic EX for 5 years now. Initially I thought it had great handling. I know now it has decent to poor handling. It's fairly mushy, the car will oscillate after dips in the road, and it leans like mad around turns. I think they've improved this somewhat on later models.

    I recently bought a 06 TSX 6spd (on order) and test drove an AT. The car does NOT drive like my Civic - not by a long shot. It's much stiffer, does not osciallate after dips, and does not lean even close to the degree the Civic does. Of course this is intuitive - the car costs more and markets itself as a "performance" car, but it also seems logical: the TSX has different suspension hardware than the Civic (double-wishbone versus MacPherson struts in the front, lower profile tires, strut tower brace in front on the TSX, and so on.)

    As I said I know the suspension on the Civic has been improved but it would be a lot to make up to get close to the TSX. The Civic _is_ lighter than the TSX, but again I don't think enough to make such a difference. Can you elaborate?
  • patpat Member Posts: 10,421
    No. Please don't elaborate, this conversation is not about the Civic. If anyone seriously wants to make that comparison, just go to the Comparisons - Sedans vs. Sedans link at the very top of the page.

    The Civic really doesn't belong here.

  • lexus_jnlexus_jn Member Posts: 102
    "Most (BMW, MB & Lexus for example) would say - rear wheel drive and at least a V6 under the hood are the bare minimum for entry into the sport sedan club"

    I tend to agree with this. If I am not mistaken, only TL or higher Acura models belongs to that group.
  • patpat Member Posts: 10,421
    We need to get back to the subject which is comparing the TSX to the IS 250. As I mentioned earlier, other comparos will be welcome, just follow the link and set up whatever interests you.
  • lexus_jnlexus_jn Member Posts: 102
    Pat, sure will do. I just replied because I thought zbill is right.
  • mvc_jonesmvc_jones Member Posts: 88
    I generally agree that for a sports sedan, the IS has more going for it than the TSX (although lack of a manual in the IS350 is unforgiveable by sports sedan standards.)

    As I read this discussion, it is to compare the IS to the TSX. Nothing qualifies the board that sports sedan characteristics are the only characteristics worthy of discussion. I think your last post acknowledges that.

    Comparing these two autos happens across many factors for different people. If judged on the basis of sports sedan only, the IS, in my opinion, is generally superior.

    If judged on the basis of sporty sedan that can also haul a mountain bike in the trunk in a pinch, the TSX wins, no contest, in my opinion. (in the context of the flexibility you suggested in your post.)

    Others feel free to discuss other criteria. Different things are meaningful to different people in offering their opinions and assessments, and it seems the point of this discussion to offer qualified opinions and assessments based on experience and needs.

    I for one didn't purchase either, as my criteria included room for 4 adults comfortably as a primary factor, and neither one offered enough room for my satisfaction (among several other criteria.) And I consider room for 4 an important criteria for both convenience and a sports/sporty sedan, as four doors with room to fit only those under 5' tall in the back does not fit my definition of the sedan portion of sports/sporty sedan...
  • z71billz71bill Member Posts: 1,986
    We all evaluate thing differently - some like spicy chicken wings (IS 250/350) - others like oat meal (TSX/ Civic) - I am not about to say that one is "better". It depends on what you want. But really some of you TSX owners need to come up for air - you are starting to embarrass yourselves.

    Think about it for a second - what company defines the luxury sport sedan segment? Is it VW (Audi), is it Buick, Kia, Saab, Saturn, Scion, Suzuki or even Toyota? I don't think SO!

    Do I even need to spell it out? We all know who the King is right?

    Doesn't it seems strange - that the best car companies in the world don't have any 4 banger - front wheel drive - econo box based cars pretending to be luxury sport sedans?

    I wonder why? NOT!

    Devore420 - please don't take this as a slam - but you are the poster child for Honda to Acura marketing. You are the reason Honda manufactures the TSX. It gives the Civic owner something to move up to. Nothing wrong with that - but just because your 20006 TSX handles better than your 2001 Civic - does not make it a sport sedan. Do you think that maybe the 2006 Civic handles better than the 2001? It will be interesting to see the skid pad numbers for the Civic and TSX - not that that tells the whole story - but won't some of you guys have red faces if the Civic turns in better numbers!
  • novicenovice Member Posts: 64
    I owned a 2003 BMW 325i. It was a great car in many respects. And it is clear by almost any set of criteria that the BMW 3 sets the bar as sports sedans go. The new 3 is even more highly touted. So as a new TSX owner I'm not about to assert that the TSX is superior to the beemer. I am always scanning the new car market as a reader and a driver. When I drove the 2006 IS250, I was underwhelmed. The ride was quite jittery. I hit my head on the stationary hand grip and I'm 5'9". I felt a bit squeezed in the cockpit. In all, while I went in expecting an experience that would pull me in the IS direction (I was very interested in AWD as well), I left feeling the car was a wanna be compared to the BMW.

    Having said that, the BMW had its flaws (we all know its virtues regarding handling, ride, etc.). The seats in the 325i were not very good. One recent (and very favorable expert) reviewer of the 2006 said don't by the 2006 325 without adding the sports seats. I didn't realize--until I owned it--that it didn't have lumbar support in the driver's seat! The stereo system was medium (TSX is a clear winner here). While I didn't buy it for trunk space (and here I have to weigh in re: fold down seats in the TSX--I can't tell you how often the fold downs would have been a bonus for all kinds of things. Cars, for most of us, are not only for fun--we need them to do a host of things generally), it lacked in that department. In-cabin storage, simple conveniences such as cup holders, etc. were not bonuses. To have some of the extras I enjoyed required additional packages or extra purchases. All at premium prices.

    The TSX provides a number of positives compared to the IS, and even the 2003 BMW (obviously the 2006 BMW is a very different story). The seats are fabulous. The bolsters and support are impressive. The cabin space is very inviting--quality materials and sound fit/finish. While most enthusiasts favor RWD, as a compromise to AWD the FWD TSX with traction and stability makes sense to me given my climate (Portland/Vancouver area). The paint on the TSX is a better quality than almost any car I've owned (Passat, Volvo S60 AWD, etc.) The ride of the TSX is comparable to both the IS and the 325.

    I haven't really pressed the TSX yet but I have to say what I've done impresses me. It holds the road, has minimum roll in cornering, and does what I ask it. Finally, my wife was beyond skeptical of what I was thinking in shifting to the TSX. After a month--she adores it.

    Regarding all the debate about what criteria have to be met in order to be a sports sedan, is it cylinders or output that should matter most (e.g. TSX 205 horses versus the previous BMW at 176, even though one is a four?). RWD has the edge--but as an overall set of considerations is it an open/closed case? Is is acceptable for those seeking a sportier drive to also favor comfort and some luxury, and therefore to conclude that a TSX as an overall package is not only desirable, it can be considered preferable to other more expensive competitors? I think so. To each his/her own.

    All for now folks..........
  • patpat Member Posts: 10,421
    Bill - mvc_jones made an excellent post. You should read it again.

    People are entitled to set their own priorities - you and everyone else. Priorities are neither right nor are they wrong, they just are. Folks are entitled to discuss their priorities here without repeatedly being told they are wrong. You see things one way, some see them another. That's the way the world goes 'round.

    You've made your feelings about these vehicles and this comparo very well known. Maybe it's time you looked around for a discussion which suits you better.
  • pg48477pg48477 Member Posts: 309
    The funny thing is how priorities of IS admirers change from on forum to another.

    In 3series vs. IS they brag about IS being the best car based on the total package and how performance really does not matter (of course except for 0-60) and how it is cheaper. They also getting upset about IS being called rebadged TOYOTA (just like TSX is based on European Honda, IS based on Japan&#146;s Toyota).

    In this forum everything is different for IS owners, suddenly total package no longer matters it&#145;s performance they crave. Here price does not matter and 8K premium for IS worth every penny. Here TSX is rebadged Honda and Lexus in the class of it own. Also, BMW is now a benchmark, RWD, V6, great handling.

    If I remember correctly Alfa Romeo makes FWD cars that considered to be one of the best in handling and it is upscale brand, maybe more so than Lexus. Both MB and BMW offer 4 bangers in Europe, isn&#146;t Mini Cooper build by BMW &#150; FWD??? Also, don&#146;t forget that neither car in this thread is in luxury sport sedan segment, but entry-level luxury performance sedan category.

    As for me, TSX and IS250 are similar in every aspect. Performance is almost the same, slight advantage to IS, not due to RWD and V6 but to it&#146;s size. TSX handles as good as IS, different due to FWD but just as good. Normally, in high-powered cars, like TL, FWD can be an issue, as one can&#146;t apply full power without causing torque steer, it&#146;s not the case in TSX. Engine power is just perfect for the FWD and suspension setup in TSX. TSX is just a fun car to drive, even though it&#146;s FWD.
  • patpat Member Posts: 10,421
    and skip the critiques of other posters ... that's where we need to be.
  • devore420devore420 Member Posts: 30
    I'm sure there are some oatmeal lovers out there, z71bill, but you can't seriously claim not to call either car "better" with an analogy like that. :) I don't take your assessment of Acura's marketing as a slam but I might point out I was responding to a suggestion that a particular unnamed econobox handles just as well as the TSX. You really have no idea if I even thought I was buying a "sport sedan" in the TSX.

    Of course the host is right and that was an off-topic digression. I tend to agree with folks that say that traditionally a "sport sedan" means at least a V6 and RWD. When I was decided to buy the TSX I was a hair's breadth away from a 325i. Personally, having driven them both (but not enough as I'd like) I'd say you cannot really compare the bare-bones driving experience of the BMW to the Acura - the beemer wins.

    I'm a moderate driving enthusiast. I love hauling [non-permissible content removed] through twisty southeastern Wisconsin roads, but I'm not going to put my car on a dyno, or a skid pad, or race other people on weekends. I dunno what "sport sedan" means but I think I bought a sedan that handles better than most, it's loaded with cool features, and I've avoided a $400+ monthly payment.

    Compared to a TSX, I'd say the IS and the 325 are more powerful, more agile, more luxurious, more expensive to buy, and more expensive to own. But just like the TSX, they're sedans that handle better than most.

    Isn't the bottom line whether you're happy with your car than whether it's a "sport sedan" or not? This forum is about the IS versus the TSX, I'd rather see comparisons based on owner experience than whether one car or the other aptly fits into a particular label.
  • z71billz71bill Member Posts: 1,986
    My posts are already long enough! - Please consider sport sedan to be short hand for entry-level luxury performance sedan.

    Just a few things that may have been lost in prior posts.

    We (this will be my wife's car) thought we wanted the TSX - liked the way it looks - read the reviews - mostly good - dealership that is only a few miles from my home has a dozen of them in stock - price looks reasonable - bla bla bla

    It was the test drive of the car that changed our minds - the car does not even come close to what I expected. BIG disappointment.

    The ride was not great - the handling was poor - and the buzzing sound coming from the dash was enough on its own to kill the deal. We tested two different cars - back to back - both were the same.

    So it was the test drive - not some 0-60 stat - or what segment the car is in - that turned us off. I just don't see how anyone could drive the TSX and IS and come away with the opinion that the ride and handling quality of both cars is about the same.

    Someone posted earlier that maybe the tires were not inflated to the correct PSI - I did not check them - but I can explain it this way.

    The ride quality was like the tires had 50 PSI - but the handling was like the tires had 20 PSI.
  • johnny420johnny420 Member Posts: 473
    I just don't see how anyone could drive the TSX and IS and come away with the opinion that the ride and handling quality of both cars is about the same.

    And I don't see how anyone can drive the TSX and come with the opinion that its handling is "poor." Relative to what? A Hummer's on-road handling is poor. The TSX's is that bad? Hmmm...

    Sorry, but this is a ridiculous assertion. Again, you're attacking your own credibility with this statement.
  • waw40waw40 Member Posts: 39
    I chose TSX relying on the opinions of its long-time users (certainly past the break-in point) and the tests performed by CR, MT, R&T, C&D, etc., which are infinitely more thorough and reliable than z7bill&#146;s &#147;test&#148; based on a couple of miles driving around the dealership.
    The only major area which could be improved according to most opinions is torque at low rpms, and the standard 0-60 parameter, which could be shortened by a fraction of a second.
    For me, 0-60 acceleration has no practical application because I will not use the car for drag racing; much more important is acceleration from 30/40 to 60/70 for highway entering and from 50/60 to 80/90 for highway passing. At those ranges TSX&#146;s performance is more than adequate.
    Having said that, I must admit that z7bill&#146;s repeated drilling the notion that IS is so superior to TSX has taken some effect and so I found a co-worker who had owned his IS for some time and who let me drive it from Monterey to San Simeon and back. Those who have driven on CA Hwy 1 will certainly agree that it is an excellent road to test the car&#146;s behavior on long straightaways, in very tight corners, and on uphill and downhill grades (remember the scenes from the &#147;Basic Instinct&#148; shot there?).

    The IS handled relatively well but IMO lacked that intuitive and hard-to-define &#147;sporty feeling&#148; of being intimately connected to the road that you get when you drive e.g. a BMW &#150; the opinion I share with many reviewers.
    Combined with my preference for the TSX interior, including the back seat features, the IS drive did nothing to convince me that I should have spent several Ks more for that automobile.
  • johnny420johnny420 Member Posts: 473
    ^^Was this the IS250 or 350?
  • waw40waw40 Member Posts: 39
    The IS250, of course. Comparison with IS350 wouldn't be fair and besides, I wouldn't even consider that model because it is only available with AT.
This discussion has been closed.