Entry Level Luxury Performance Sedans

nyccarguy · December 2011

My thoughts on my 2010 TSX sort of echo some of your feelings toward your TL SH-AWD. The engine/transmission combination is very smooth. They feel perfectly matched together. I don't oogle over the styling of my TSX like say a 335i w/ M Sport Package, but its design is handsome & far from boring.

Could my TSX use more power via DI, FSI, Turbo, or Supercharging? Yes, but then how much torque could the front wheels handle? Would Acura's SH-AWD add too much as far as weight (& price) to its current entry level price tag without stealing sales from the base FWD TL?

I'm happy with my TSX.

markcincinnati · December 2011

The TL should only be sold in AWD trim, IMHO. According to my Ohio dealers, most of the TL's sold are Tech SH-AWD's anyway. I think Acura should do what Audi does in the US -- sell AWD cars (99% anyway) period.

Content and price them with options and packages that make sense, but don't push massive amounts of technology in one package. In other words, offer a basic version of the cars (but ONLY in AWD trim.)

SH-AWD is damn near magic, it totally transforms the basic FWD car into a really believable ELLPS car. My dealers claim they sell mostly MDX's anyway, so Acura already seems to have at least the possibility of being all AWD all the time like Audi.

With the FWD models clouding the message, it seems Acura's sometimes are more like VW's than Audis, yet Acura has essentially stated it wants to be in the Premium class and that it wants to model itself on Audi.

I assume this makes sense since VW begat Audi and Honda begat Acura. Audi morphed (in the us) to the "quattro" company and claims to be the reigning champeen of AWD cars (with the most history, don't you know?) Audi has essentially eschewed FWD cars (in North America) in favor of AWD cars in order to be taken seriously as a contender in the Premium class -- where only RWD and AWD are taken seriously, it's in all the papers.

Acura keeps hanging on to its Honda roots where it's good AND where it's not so good, premium perception-wise. Audi, morphed from FWD to FWD and/or AWD to AWD, period. They entered and won contests and races and Wards awards and other awards, but these awards and the spoils of winning were all accomplished with their AWD versions. Although I guess you could buy an FWD A4 or A6, I don't know where you go to actually find one in the flesh for sale at a dealer.

And Audi did wonder "how much power can one put throught the front wheels" -- its answer was "not enough, so we need to put MORE power through the front AND rear wheels." And they are where they are now by taking the risk of virtually dropping FWD from the NA market.

And what happened next? BMW brought out the 325 (in 1988 (?) as I recall, since I had one) with AWD; then Mercedes started offering AWD here and there. Acura, Infiniti, Lexus, Volvo, VW, Cadillac, Buick and, and, and, the list goes on to cover every LPS and LPS wannabe brand and product.

As to the price impact -- I think it would be pretty easy to keep the price of an all SH-AWD fleet at about the current FWD models + $1,500; for the safety and performance this would offer, to say nothing of an image enhancement similar to that which Audi enjoyed, it is probably not a show stopper for the company.

And, most of us shopping in this class will probably not reject a new Acura that is exclusively offered with SH-AWD. For most, it ought to be a no-brainer.

I have nothing against FWD, btw, I just think it would be very helpful to Acura if it has the goal of remaining a serious premium class brand, to completely ditch any and all FWD offerings from its lineup.

:surprise:

shipo · December 2011

Funny thing, for my current needs, wants and desires, the "perfect" car for me right-now-today would be an Audi A3 RWD (sacrilege I know, but I want it none-the-less) with a hotted up 2.0T and a 6-Speed manual. Of course no such a critter will ever exist, but one can dream can't one.

dino001 · December 2011

I think Acura should do what Audi does in the US -- sell AWD cars (99% anyway) period.

That's not entirely accurate. A3s and A4s are sold here mostly in FWD (Tampa). I asked a salesguy about it once. He surprised me. To Audi without AWD is like nonalcoholic beer or worse.

sweendogy · December 2011

While I agree Acura should "advance" I feel they do not need to completely change to awd. They did very well in the 90 and 2000s with a front wheel drive setup. The biggest mistake is they lost its passion and have made the car more Buick then BMW. The dropped the low cost integra that got the youth in the door. They made the tsx bloated and its best car the TL (legend) is ugly and bloated. They also killed the nsx which was a reason to go into the dealership in the first place. Fwd setup not great for performance but it was these thigs that killed the brand and it's sales numbers. - Sh-awd or whatever it's called is pretty good setup but it's not the answer to get people in the door- they have more cara in th lineup then they did 10 years ago and sell half the number of cars.

tlong · December 2011

While I agree Acura should "advance" I feel they do not need to completely change to awd. They did very well in the 90 and 2000s with a front wheel drive setup. The biggest mistake is they lost its passion and have made the car more Buick then BMW. The dropped the low cost integra that got the youth in the door. They made the tsx bloated and its best car the TL (legend) is ugly and bloated. They also killed the nsx which was a reason to go into the dealership in the first place. Fwd setup not great for performance but it was these thigs that killed the brand and it's sales numbers. - Sh-awd or whatever it's called is pretty good setup but it's not the answer to get people in the door- they have more cara in th lineup then they did 10 years ago and sell half the number of cars.

Excellent post on Acrua, sween. Agree 100%. And I drive an '05 TL. A much better looking car IMHO than the current one. Acura has really lost its way, as has Honda.

nyccarguy · December 2011

I think that's an excellent idea. Definitely a great way to differentiate Acura from its Honda roots. Buyers here in the northeast & new England will buy anything and everything AWD.

Give my TSX a turbo, SH AWD, & excellent brakes (the oem brakes are pathetic) & I'd give it another look.

markcincinnati · December 2011

If my message somehow went too far, I apologize -- I do not believe that moving to an all AWD line-up (or 99%, as in the case of Audi -- and in the case of Audi it is 100% of their advertising) will alone re-position Acura in the minds of the intended customers.

As I mentioned in my earlier post, the crux of the issue is not how these cars drive (if the 2012 TL Advance SH-AWD is any indicator), they are not a boring drive, not an incompetent drive, nor lacking in performance. The thing is the cars are pretty much not very attractive -- even if they do get bonus points for trying to look different.

They have the driving thing in pretty good shape as far as I'm concerned -- they need to modernize the engines and look at the content that is offered by every car brand/product they wish to emulate and be guided accordingly.

They need to consider making themselves perceived solely as an AWD company and they need an across the board styling transplant or upgrade asap.

Probably more than any other step they could take, styling is the one that will bear the most fruit. For, no matter how much they up their game in the performance or content arena, people need something to draw them to the showroom and something to feel good about after they buy.

My '12 TL is "better" in so many ways than my '09 A4 -- which was the first year for the change to the B8 platform for Audi. I would not expect this to remain thus -- a refreshed A4, most likely, will again be more attractive (in all the above ways) than the current TL (from a design perspective mainly.)

You don't have to agree with the magazines, but the current A6, which looks very much like a larger B8, A4, is winning friends, awards wise. No Acura is on any list I can find. BMW, too, remains a repeat top choice amongst those who award wins for being great.

Acura simply needs a style-ectomy, soon.

:sick:

sweendogy · December 2011

Style I agree - I also think they need to go cheaper to find youth buyers. We have heard from owners that the TSX is a great value - but it's still 30k an bulk of the buyers are older people- make a 25k coupe with a power 4 that gets youth in the door. All in you can't pick a car under the Acura nameplate that says look at me - "I'm rediculously good looking" - and that's a major problem.

Love the traction this is finally getting - its time to release the TsX from this Elpps chat once and all as a lesson to Acura you can't stand around for 10 years and do nothing in an evolving car biz. (sorry for typos, iPhone)

nyccarguy · December 2011

Sween - I agree with you & Mark that the Acura lineup definitely needs a makeover. You are right that none of the models scream "I gotta have it."

Like I said, my TSX is handsome (IMHO) but its styling doesn't compare to BMW, Audi, MB.

Practicality, Luxury, & Technology are driving people into Acura showrooms rather than style & performance.

markcincinnati · December 2011

Isn't the upcoming RSX supposed to come in at a lower price point? Of course then there's the issue that the TSX is supposedly a cancelled product and that the TL will shrink in size.

But if you can at least suggest that you can offer a lower entry point, price-wise, you may find you attract more and younger customers. Truth be told the TL is actually much bigger feeling than my outgoing A4, which did, technically, have a longer wheel-base, but the TL is wider.

Again, we seem to be in violent agreement, Acura needs an overall styling cue that is spread across all cars and, first and foremost, is attractive.

You may or may not like the look of an Audi, but the entire line from the lowest cost A3 to the big buck A8L or R8 all have cues that they are Audi's.

BMW, ditto.

Acura is trying with their beak front end, but it obviously wasn't working for them, considering the plastic surgery the TL just underwent.

C'mon let's make some good looking cars -- at all price points!

ivan_99 · December 2011

C'mon let's make some good looking cars -- at all price points!

...any KIA (Rio starting at 13k).

To me it seemed like the Acura beak was trying to imitate the Cadillac shield...but it ended up looking to thick and plasticky...

nyccarguy · December 2011

I don't know how much lower the price of an entry level Acura can go. I think the average new car price is $30K. The $30K price point is the new $20K price point of 15 years ago.

dino001 · December 2011

They should have never ditched RSX. That would have been a great $25K+ entry with $28K-30K Type S. Small overlap with top of Civic with extra zip (make base engine 10 hp stronger) and equipment.

Honda must be experiencing some big internal struggles that we don't know about. Just look at latest Civic and Accord. The "sportyish" DNA is all but gone, virtually no trace.

I recently a rented Accord (yes, I was surpirised myself - Hertz had Accord in their rental fleet). Mechanicals were adequate, but the car did not impress me at all. Really cheap interior, barge look, even some ergonomics were not so great (always strong suit of Japanese cars). Long story short, if I were in market for family midsize sedan, Accord may not even make the short list.

sweendogy · December 2011

Mark- I have no details on the new Rsx- which as am ex integra gs-r owner I had no interest in- car was not that excitingly all- the integra had the ns-x to look up to plus my gs-r was close to the type r that was very rare and wanted by anyone under 28 years old.

NYCcarguy- the death of the Rsx and the no entry point at mid 20ks is a problem- the 4 door current TSx is boring - no other term to use- its a nice safe play but 95% are auto an 97% come with the 4 that is taxed in its current form.

They have alot of holes, no supercar, no coupe, no convert, Zdx, a turbo 4 that gets terrible Mpgs, ugly Tl, tsx thats bloated, Zdx and the fact that it's current line does not have one car people have to own (see sonata). Yes I mentioned the Zdx 2 times- it seats 4, weights more then the mdx, ugly and has the sr engine as then mdx- also its overpriced .

Acura is the new Buick. Buick is the new startup. Acura has 2 choices given recent sales numbers - die or redue. Acura has a choice to make - let's hope they choose wisely.

tlong · December 2011

They have alot of holes, no supercar, no coupe, no convert, Zdx, a turbo 4 that gets terrible Mpgs, ugly Tl, tsx thats bloated, Zdx and the fact that it's current line does not have one car people have to own (see sonata). Yes I mentioned the Zdx 2 times- it seats 4, weights more then the mdx, ugly and has the sr engine as then mdx- also its overpriced .

Interesting points. When I bought my TL in '04, the TL was among the best looking sedans out there, they had the tight, nimble, and pretty good looking TSX, they had the RSX, they had the original better looking MDX. Then they bloated and uglied up the whole line, and dropped the RSX. A bunch of steps backwards. No wonder they are slipping in sales. Honda has really lost its way.

sweendogy · December 2011

Yep - I think both last generation tl and tsx were good cars- they looked the part - didnt dare challenge, because Acura was smart and didn't include them in the conversation with real lux sports cars. They both were very well prices to the lower end and again both looked great.

I feel when the last Acura name died (integra) I think the brand was slowly doing soon there after

nyccarguy · December 2011

Your ideal vehicle sweendoggy?

The result is a BRZ that came in under its target weight at 2,690 pounds according to Subaru. That's about 100 pounds less than a Honda Civic Si, and it feels like it, too.

sweendogy · December 2011

Never saw that thing before- 24-25k coupe hat has some go- that's what the next rsx or integra should be - nice post.

m6user · December 2011

Scion will market the same thing in US and Toyota will market the same in Japan. All three have 200hp and not a lot of torque until screaming. Subaru did engine...Toyota most of the rest. Not entry level luxury but entry level sports.

flightnurse · December 2011

Funny you should ask that questions. Now this is at Camelback BMW (here in PHX) the sales guy tells me that he lease's about 3-4 of those uber low monthly payments 3 series to people who shouldn't own one. He tries to talk them out of them and explains that the mileage restrictions will kill them at the end of lease. But, people do not listen to them at all.

flightnurse · December 2011

Shipo when you quote someone, don't change the original quote. Sween never wrote v6.

"with the new 328 coming out soon - and sporting a 4cyl engine, that outperforms the current v6, does this change the way we look at this ELLPS foruM?"

flightnurse · December 2011

Makes sense - would guess 7 series closer to 70 owned vs lease

Sween yes and when it comes to buying them, it usually a cash deal to boot.

flightnurse · December 2011

I read a review on the new 2012 Z4 with this new engine, I was impressed that the Z4 is a better car with the turbo 4, its faster, a more balanced car and did get better mileage then with the old 3 liter 6. Now one would hope that the new 3 series will have the same benefit as the Z4. Also, turners will start to play with the new engine and we will see the HP rating go up, now if they can get the engine to produce 300hp and 300lbs of torque and be reliable then why buy the 335...

ALso MB had a 4 cl in thier C class for many years and dropped it for a small V6, will MB go back to a entry level 4 cl?

nyccarguy · December 2011

I understand the new Turbo 4 weighs less than the outgoing I6. I know that aides primarily in handling & balance & all that good stuff. How much better fuel economy does it get? How much of the better fuel economy is due to the 4cyl engine & how much is due to the new 8 speed auto? Look at the numbers of the 2011 528i vs. the 2012 528i.

shipo · December 2011

I didn't change the quote, I copied/pasted it exactly as sweendogy originally wrote it; apparently the post was edited after I commented on it.

Too bad this site doesn't have a "Last edited..." footnote like vBulletin powered forums do. That said, if you look at the two posts concerned, you'll see the timestamp of his original post is eleven minutes after my post which is immediately below his.

shipo · December 2011

While the numbers aren't official yet, I have it on good authority (remember, I used to live literally down the street from BMW-NA and still have lots of friends in the neighborhood) that the new 328i will return a real-world "high thirties" on the highway. As for what the EPA tests will report, that has yet to be seen.

qbrozen · December 2011

That would be very impressive.

shipo · December 2011

I agree, and oh geez do I want one with a sweet shifting 6-Speed manual.

nyccarguy · December 2011

I know BMWs typically exceed their published numbers whether it be EPA fuel economy estimates, horsepower & torque claims... Especially after break in.

It is very cool that the new Blown 4cyl 3 is impressing the brass @ BMWNA. I'm excited for a 6 speed stick version too. I'm also really impressed with the sub 6 second 0-60 time. I can't wait until BMW puts this thing up on their build your own on their website.

dino001 · December 2011

I still rather have NA straight 6. Perhaps if (when) gas goes to 5-6 buck a gallon, I'll change my mind.

I basically decided to jump in and get one before new 328, exactly because of the four cylinder replacing base six in 328 (got the wagon, so no 335i on that, plus 50K+ after some options still too much for me). Boy, what a sweet machine - drove it in Germany on Autobahn, got to 138 mph before traffic stopped me. Now waiting for delivery in Spartanburg - probably in January.

Don't care about lower gas mileage, don't care about lower weight, higher power/torque. I just wanted that NA straight six - it's probably one of the best engines in the history. And I bet BMW would never have changed, if not for the new CAFE.

I had enough four cylinder turbos - 2002 WRX and 2008 WRX STI, which are boxers, inherently better configurations that straight four. Fast, great handling, in some aspects may better than 328 (allows faster corner entry and maintains that speed throughout). Still - I just wanted more "adult" car than my STI, was ready to give up some power and even some handling.

To me BMW 3-series was always about two things: weight distribution (50/50) and straight six. The 328 I just bought had interior that is just OK, but it looks like it was designed thirty minutes before the car was to be released - give some nice leather and wood inlays, add dashboard from 1989 and you're done. The car overcomes that in those mechanical aspects, but take of of them away and other choices become very compelling.

Audis are so much better looking(by a mile) both inside and out, have better equipment, cheaper. Or being a little on frugal side, I may get even lower to TSX (not sure about that, but would give it a try) or even Volvo V50.

To me BMW voluntarily gave up something they had over their competition. They better make it up in other areas - or else.

qbrozen · December 2011

Not all engines are created equal, though. You can't condemn all 4-cyl turbos based on your subaru experience. The turbo boxer 4 is actually quite coarse compared to, say, the 2 liter VW turbo. That same 2 liter is also smoother and much more flexible than Volvo's I5 turbo. So you should really withold judgegment until you try it.

dino001 · December 2011

That's not what I meant. Actually Subaru boxers are great. Exhaust note is almost as intoxicating as that on the BMW's six. But I have not met I4 that I was impressed with. To me they all sound like sewing machines. They may be quiter (some) or more powerful than those from Subaru (not many, esp. STI), but it usually comes with high cost (counterweight balance shafts). Boxer is naturally balanced, just like straight six and offers low CG. No, I'd rather have the H4, or even I5 before I would get I4.

But more important - I got I6, which is what all I wanted for now. :shades:

ivan_99 · December 2011

heh

"He tries to talk them out of them and explains that the mileage restrictions will kill them at the end of lease. But, people do not listen to them at all."

Something about the customers not listening to the voice of reason by the salesman makes me laugh

shipo · December 2011

In way too many instances, "the voice of reason by the salesman" = oxymoron.

kdshapiro · December 2011

If I lived in Az, I would not lease a car. It's way to easy to pile the miles on your car. Where I live now is another story. I leased my car because I have a very good handle on my yearly mileage.

Kirstie_H · December 2011

A major news network is seeking to interview someone who was saved from serious injury/death in an auto accident due to new safety technology. The ideal candidate should live in close proximity to a major metropolitan area, i.e. Los Angeles, Chicago, New York City, etc. Please send an email to pr@edmunds.com by 3 pm/pt, December 8.

sweendogy · December 2011

Hes right I did changed it- since edmunds gives the option to change I used it to chamge it- but obviously you didn't get what I was saying - v6 a6 I 6 who cares it was 6 as being the point - and the fact that the class leader was changing its standard engine to a 4. Act as if.

markcincinnati · December 2011

According to the web-zine, Winding Road: their review of the new I4 turbo makes me feel that one would not feel slighted having a BMW with this motor, quite the contrary. Their comments about the new larger 3 series, also encouraging.

shipo · December 2011

Agreed. All else being equal I'd opt for a normally aspirated I6 over a blown I4, however, all else ain't even close to being equal. Specifically:
- The I4 Turbo has more maximum power and torque, and a substantially wider/flatter power band.
- The I4 Turbo weighs significantly less than the I6 which will aid in handling and fuel economy.
- The I4 Turbo is shorter (albeit wider by virtue of the turbo and its requisite plumbing) than the I6, and as such is easier to package which should in turn make service easier.
- The I4 Turbo returns significantly better fuel economy.

This is not to discount the fact that I6 motors are naturally balanced and have virtually no torque reversal events (of which there are two for every rotation of a 4-Cylinder/4-Stroke engine), and as such are naturally smoother both in operation and in power delivery. That said, the portion of the roughness of an I4 which is attributable to the engine's natural imbalance is A) relatively minor due to its 2.0 liter displacement (the threshold beyond which balance shafts become increasingly necessary), and are easily cancelled via a relatively small/light weight set of balance shafts.

Long story short, take a drive in a late model GTI or A3 (or A4 or A5) 2.0T and try and find something objectionable about the power delivery vis-à-vis a late model 328i. I've now had two I6 BMWs; the engine in my wife's new GTI is easily on par with the unit installed in both of my mounts from Munich.

flightnurse · December 2011

Mileage I haven't heard yet from anyone who has a new 528i or Z4, but in theory it should get better mileage, however its a realitive thing if you are always in the boost then mileage is going to suck.

flightnurse · December 2011

Shipo this is encouraging to hear, but when your friends say high 30's they can't mean 37 or 38 on highway. IF true, this would throw a big wrench in both the hybrid world and thier own diesel 3 series. BTW, I think the 3 series BMW is a true wolf in sheep clothing, drove one and loved it, however the price tag to enter I couldn't justify.

flightnurse · December 2011

Why is it easy to pile miles on in AZ, say Austin or Tampa? Since I live in Phoenix, I hardly drive many miles (I'm usually in another city working) however when I was working in Phoenix, I didn't but more miles then when I lived in San Diego.

shipo · December 2011

The highway MPG number that I've heard bandied about is just what you suggested, 37 to 38. That said, I don't think it will be much of a show-stopper for the new 320d (either version) because, while the numbers are harder to squeeze out of those in the know, very high forties or low fifties are what I'm led to believe.

busiris · December 2011

According to info posted about the new Z4 sDrive 28i on www.fueleconomy.gov, its estimated to get 33mpg hwy, with the new 8 speed transmission.

While I would never say never, I don't see how a larger car will use the same, or very similar running gear and do better than the Z4. I can't see the high 30's... At best, the very low 30's, which is still nothing to whine about, IMO.

kdshapiro · December 2011

When I go there, I normally put 50'to 100 miles a day on my car. If I worked in Phoenix I would commute 80 miles r/t. To me that's piling on the miles.

shipo · December 2011

The numbers I've been quoted are for RWD and Manual Transmission equipped F30 328i models; in the case of the Z4 this configuration yields 34 mpg on the highway. That said, my understanding is that while the engine in the 2012 Z4 is the same basic engine, the unit which will find its way into the F30 has a few changes. As I understand things, the new engine should deliver slightly more power and better fuel economy.

Time will tell.

sweendogy · December 2011

With the added power, better Mpgs and it being a little bit lighter - question will be why would anyone buy a 335 ? Performance wise they are very similar reading car and driver- they can both be set with the m package- plus Mpgs in the mid 30s highway ... Won't be long before BMW bumps the HP on the 335 I would guess.

shipo · December 2011

I've had the exact same thoughts.

dino001 · December 2011

And the price, too, of course.

Entry Level Luxury Performance Sedans

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles