I find that both the Canadian and Aussie press splatter is better than what we get here in the states. It requires some translation, and the product lines don't always match up, but the info is still good.
On a winding road, you can push the Accord quite hard with confidence, as you have good feedback through the steering and a good sense of remaining traction This is a strong endorsement indeed.. I am not doubting the reviewer as the 2003 Accord has 27% more rigid chassis(if I recall correctly) and better engine than the previous models.
About the ride/handling compromise, has anyone here driven both 2003 Accord and BMW 325i without sport suspension and what are the subjective impressions about handling and ride quality ?
Well, many of the cars that the WRX targets (IS300, A4, 325 etc) are also direct competitors of the TSX. The TSX just happens to offer most of the creature comforts that the BMW, Lexus, Audi offer for 5-10k more for the same price as a bare-bones WRX. For many, this is why it is the perfect compromise.
Sorry, but if someone is seriously considering a WRX, there's little chance they'll end up in a TSX, and vice-versa. These cars are almost totally different in both intent and execution -- there isn't much overlap between a touring sedan and a rally car. Given that, it hardly seems a fair comparison for either car.
And, if you're comparing mechanical features (as opposed to luxo bits), the TSX is the one that ends up looking "bare-bones." But again, since there's little commonality, comparing to two is a mostly wasted effort.
On paper, yes maybe they are two highly different cars but many real people (ie: those who actually looking to buy a car and drive it every day, not car geeks who debate 0-60 times and dyno) who look at the cars in their price range and go from there. I for one love the idea of the WRX and think it is a blast to drive. On the other hand I love the luxury touches of the TSX. I have yet to decide which I like better.
Take a look at clubwrx.com and clubtsx.com, I think you'd be surprised how many of those guys have compared the cars.
Redkey - I think you missed the point of that article. The did the comparison despite the fact that the cars do not compete with one another. It was kind of like comparing the Civic Si, S2000, and NSX in a bang for the buck contest.
Very much in synch with my personal impressions. I'm not trying to say that the Accord exhibits the handling prowess of a more overtly sporty car like a TSX or 6. But it's hardly the dog that you portray it to be, IMO and also in the opinion of R&T, C&D, Motor Trend, etc.
What do you honestly think I'd say about a nose-diving, understeering, FWD family sedan with 16s that squeals on an off-ramp going on 60? That's a dog in my book.
BTW, I drive a 330i with performance package. So you figure out what my barometer is for a car to have decent handling.
Cowboy, sorry but performance does not equate to straight speed. Pull out what ever defintiion you want. It's one component of what makes a car entertaining. The Miata has very little power but it offers RWD, a nimble chassis and handling that's sublime. I'd call that a far better performer than a simple press-the-gas-pedal and go V6 accord.
To each his own. Straight speed to me is useless if the car wallows, tilts, squeals and falls all over itself in the corners. If we all just wanted straight speed, we should pick up an old mustang or camaro and drop in a V8.
Oh sure, you can compare anything with anything else. I thought the issue was whether or not anyone who is actually going to purchase a car would make that comparison.
I wouldn't necessarily compare the two cars, but I can definitely see how one person could be shopping both of them. They are both 4-doors in relatively the same price range. Although very different, I could see myself in either one. My wife, however, may see things differently.
I for one have had both cars on my "consider" list. The criteria for me was a modestly sized sedan, somewhat sporty and fun to drive, mid-high 20s. Not saying that these are direct competitors, but certainly both made the long list (if not short).
Like Varmint said, you can "cross-shop" or "compare" any number of cars to your heart's content, but the TSX and WRX have very distinct flavors. The fact that the WRX sedan now offers a moonroof and heated seats & exterior mirrors won't convince anyone interested in the TSX (or 325i, A4, IS300, etc.) that the WRX is a near-lux car. Just like the TSX's powertrain won't convince a point-and-shoot driver that the TSX is a performance car.
Heck, I've cross-shopped the WRX with the TSX, which is why I simply don't see most folks narrowing their lists down to those cars as the two finalists. When it comes down to figuring out which car suits you best for day-to-day operation, the choice between them becomes more of a litmus test than a matter of degrees.
Just a point in retort to those who critcize the handling on the Accord V6. I am personally driving a TSX, so I was willing to sacrifice speed, ride comfort, an space, for superior handling. But, I have to say, that I think the Accord handles pretty well. No, it isn't a BMW. It won't even handle as well as M6 or Passat. But, for most drivers, even some aggressive drivers,the handling will be fine.
The Accord is all about balance (even more so than the TSX). It handles well, accelerates well, and rides well. It also has one of the best drivetrains available on ANY car. All with a world-class interior (for the price range) and reliability that can't be beat. To me, it is an excellent overall package.
What do you honestly think I'd say about a nose-diving, understeering, FWD family sedan with 16s that squeals on an off-ramp going on 60? That's a dog in my book."
What did I honestly think you'd say? Well, let's just say I wasn't disappointed.
Anyway, if that's your position, then please explain the R&T comments and handling scores. They had amazingly high praise for the handling of a car that you characterize as a "dog".
Say what you want... I'll take my own opinion and that of Road and Track, since they clearly have some measure of objectivity that your assessment lacks. What's objectivity? It's the ability to recognize the reality that a car doesn't have to handle as well as a BMW 330i with performance package to be considered a good handling car.
And I'm not even remotely suggesting that the Accord is the right car for someone with your particular "sensibilities".
I believe this article also called this Beemer a dog, sort of, since this 4WD 3-series has a mandatory raised suspension, which is the opposite of the lowered sport suspension.
For a lot of people, this raised suspension is just right for them, especially to substitute a Mercedes sedan's ride comfort w/ better handling.
Anyway, if that's your position, then please explain the R&T comments and handling scores.
Sorry whatever is printed by the various car mags is useless to your personal tastes. Should I suddenly change my mind and rush out to buy an accord v6 because some guy at RT claims it's agood handler? My personal preferences be damned?
I'll take my own opinion and that of Road and Track,
Your opinion (and your spouse's) should be the only one that matters for a purchase. What a lackey at RT believes shouldn't influence your purchase.
since they clearly have some measure of objectivity that your assessment lacks. What's objectivity? It's the ability to recognize the reality that a car doesn't have to handle as well as a BMW 330i with performance package to be considered a good handling car.
That's not being objective! Objectivity and car tests don't mesh well. You could say that any car that hits 60 in under 7 seconds is fast but in reality you've subjectively chosen a number so all cars that fit your bill are now winners of a fast label because you made a choice that sub-7 seconds = fast.
I don't hide my subjectivity or claim to offer an objective viewpoint (an oxymoron coming from a human). An accord V6's handling ranks about a 5/10 on my scale. The TSX hits a 6. My BMW is maybe an 8 but more likely a 7. EVERY car is measured on the same scale. I don't cut a Focus slack because it's a subcompact. If it's a grin-inducing handler then god bless it. If it wallows like a pig (CTS), then it's gonna get rated as such vis-a-vis all cars. A prius is on the same road as a 911 turbo. They're measured on the same scale.
"Anyway, if that's your position, then please explain the R&T comments and handling scores.
Sorry whatever is printed by the various car mags is useless to your personal tastes. Should I suddenly change my mind and rush out to buy an accord v6 because some guy at RT claims it's agood handler? My personal preferences be damned?"
So obviously you can't. Thanks for putting your opinion into perspective.
#2646 BlueDot said "..An accord V6's handling ranks about a 5/10 on my scale. "
Actually I think the Accord V-6 6-speed ranks about a 9 and here is why
Performance: 0-60 6.2 very good ( can use 80-90% of time) Handling: better than average ( max handling rarely used, 50-80% handling limits part of the time; most of the time a normal person uses less than 50% of handling capabilities; minimal factor) Better tires could improve! ; actually I have had a very good handling RDW M3 in the past. Gas mileage: 21/30 excellent on regular about a 2 mpg effective more than premium. space: very good back seat is a little small in Coupe Utility: very good: decent size trunk, split fold down seats Reliability: Honda quality very high Braking: a little low, but acceptable Resale: excellent Features: Near Luxury, beats all competitors: heated seats, dual auto-climate, sunroof , cruise, electroluminescent gauges ( I hate red gauges), voice NAV: missing : memory seats, Xexon lights, real wood, rain sensing wipers, backup monitor, power passenger seat, charcoal air filter, 3 or 4 zone climate control. Value: excellent. Drive: FWD ; this is a topic for discussion but all around if you have any snow or ice even occasionally, RWD just doesn't work. I have had performance cars in both and granted RWD gives a weight balance closer to 50/50 instead of 60/40 you only notice the difference when driving at 90-100 of handling capabilities and that is not where most people drive!
Actually the Accord 6-speed V-6 is very high on my short list. One has to wonder why someone with a BMW would even participate on an Acura discussion board, unless they had buyers remorse or still weren't sure they made the right decision.
Yeah I've noticed a lot of BMW owners get a bit defensive and feel the need to tear down every car that isn't a BMW. The Accord handling may not be fantastic, but it's hardly a dog. It's been my experience that the people who say it isn't fun just don't know how to drive to get the full effect.
I didn't say it was just them. But I have noticed that owners of certain makes get more defensive than others. There's usually a correlation between price and defensiveness. As the price of the car goes up, so to does the defensiveness of their owners. It's almost like they feel the need to prove to everyone that their car is worth the money and the rest of us are driving junk. I'm not saying all BMW owners are like this, but a lot of em are.
BMW owners, in general, are a little touchy. I think it comes from the stereotype of BMW owners being chardonnay swilling yuppies that are just buying the image, and could care less about the attributes of the car. When I had my 911, I was the same way.. Constantly trying to convince others that I really wasn't a big a--hole, or compensating for small genitalia. (no comment on whether either of those are true) I bought the car because it was my dream car, and I loved it. But, you still get stereotyped. I think owners of BMW's, Mercedes, and Porsche for the most part have to put up with that. And I think on the whole, they are defensive about it.
I think it is a serious lack of judgement to rate all cars on the exact same scale just because they all ride on the same roads. This type of all-or-nothing thinking is not only very simple (and potentially dangerous), but fails to distinguish certain cars that are adept to certain characteristics. I would have agreed with you (blueguy)if you had stated that you judged cars based on your needs. But generalizing itself is a tragic flaw.
Personally, I feel that it is in everyone's best interest to find out all the information available, ie Car Mags, and reviews. One needn't agree with the reviews, but it should provide a starting point to evaluate vehicles on each individual's independent need. And yes, I do care what the Mags write. If not, then why would I read them, or for that matter, even be posting messages on a website that caters to those seeking objective information.
The only part of your statement I can agree on, is all owners get passionate about their cars. Have you been in the Toyota, Honda, Mazda forums? People are defensive about their cars and the acronym, BMW is nowhere to be found.
I think you have to be careful about generalizations. Your defense of your 911 has no bearing on anybody else.
Actually the Accord 6-speed V-6 is very high on my short list. One has to wonder why someone with a BMW would even participate on an Acura discussion board, unless they had buyers remorse or still weren't sure they made the right decision.
Because I dug the TSX and I want it to do well. I encourage people to discover this great, high value little sport sedan. If I had to do it over again, I'd choose the same car. That doesn't mean I can't respect what a great car the TSX really is.
think it is a serious lack of judgement to rate all cars on the exact same scale just because they all ride on the same roads. This type of all-or-nothing thinking is not only very simple (and potentially dangerous), but fails to distinguish certain cars that are adept to certain characteristics.
When you look at a car you look at all its attributes. To say otherwise is not realistic. Laid before you are thousands of cars. They all have pluses and minuses.
I refuse to accept it's right to categorize cars and then judge them. I hate modifiers like, "For a family sedan, this is a great handling car." No way. As a car is it great handling? People pull this same garbage when reviewing movies or restuarants. For an action film it's really good. For a walk-in place it's good. No, in the scheme of ALL the competition, is it good?
Personally, I feel that it is in everyone's best interest to find out all the information available, ie Car Mags, and reviews. One needn't agree with the reviews, but it should provide a starting point to evaluate vehicles on each individual's independent need.
Try on every car for yourself. You won't know there's a gem out there that fits you perfectly until you experience it firsthand. No amount of writing by guys at RT will make an MR2 spyder's handling real to you. you must feel it for yourself. Based on stats the Altima could seem like a great car but once you sit inside it you discover the armrest just doesn't feel right. You need to feel it for yourself.
"I refuse to accept it's right to categorize cars and then judge them. I hate modifiers like, "For a family sedan, this is a great handling car." No way. As a car is it great handling? People pull this same garbage when reviewing movies or restuarants. For an action film it's really good. For a walk-in place it's good. No, in the scheme of ALL the competition, is it good?"
Firstly, what criteria do you have for a "good" car? Is a Toyota Camry any less of a car because it doesn't have the handling characteristics of a 3-series? Some may argue that the Camry is a better quality car, with less problems. Would you say that an MDX is a worse car than the great handling S2000? No. It depends entirely on what you're looking for (Space vs sportiness). In essence, you want a great handling car. And that is your criteria,and that is perfectly fine. But please don't generalize that that is the only thing that makes a "good" car. I'm currently seeking a half-ton pick up right now: do you think I care at all about handling characteristics? Would all Pick-ups be considered bad vehicles? And modifiers are perfectly acceptable. When I'm in the mood for fast food, I would go to a Wendy's or MacDonald's, and no go to a fine dining restaurant. It is completely unfair to judge things on one basic level. If you are judging things for handling characteristics, then of course you will judge all cars on that criterion. Not all people will judge based on one characteristic. Note: I agree with you whole heartedly that the TSX is indeed a choice vehicle. I drove one yesterday, and came away incredibly impressed. Mostly, I was impressed with it's polish and panache. "Try on every car for yourself. You won't know there's a gem out there that fits you perfectly until you experience it firsthand. No amount of writing by guys at RT will make an MR2 spyder's handling real to you. you must feel it for yourself. Based on stats the Altima could seem like a great car but once you sit inside it you discover the armrest just doesn't feel right. You need to feel it for yourself. "
I agree - you must try every car for yourself. And you're right, no amount of writing will convince me otherwise. Please recall that I said that reviews can really help as a starting point, and that they can also open your eyes to potentially good and bad characteristics.
"I hate modifiers like, "For a family sedan, this is a great handling car." No way. As a car is it great handling?"
You and I appear to have very different approaches to evaluating a car.
Without clarification, the scale of review comments is lost. We'd end up with a handling scale of 1-10 with dumptrucks at a 1 and supercars at the top. On that scale, the ratings for any given family sedan might be .00232 higher or lower than those for a another car in its class. Try to make an intelligent verbal or written statement out of that.
It is very important to understand the audience/target market for a car. In addition to keeping scale in perspective, this leads to the value of a particular attribute. For example, good handling is a prized attribute for supercars, not so much for dumptrucks.
Are there a lot of accidents invloving dump trucks? I would venture to say, on a percentage basis, that more hot rod cars, and suped-up cars are involved in more accidents.
It depends entirely on what you're looking for (Space vs sportiness).
That's what I wrote.
But please don't generalize that that [handling] is the only thing that makes a "good" car.
I never wrote anything of the sort. Pull quotes where I said that.
And modifiers are perfectly acceptable. When I'm in the mood for fast food, I would go to a Wendy's or MacDonald's, and no go to a fine dining restaurant. It is completely unfair to judge things on one basic level. If you are judging things for handling characteristics, then of course you will judge all cars on that criterion. Not all people will judge based on one characteristic.
I never said I do that either. A quality cars has numerous parts that combine to make the driving experience special. I've frequently mentioned Goldilocks because that's what carbuying is like. You try out everything and when you slip into one that fits just right, you don't want to leave.
At no point did I write that a car's handling is the final determination of whether or not a car is quality or not. I wrote that that Accord V6 is a dog when it comes to handling, that I'd rate it about a 5 on a scale of 1-10 for handling and that I'd choose a myriad of other cars over it. But at no juncture did I write that a car's handling prowess was the final factor in making a purchase. So as to avoid anyone making more assertions about me rating handling as the only characteristic of worth: all cars have pluses and minuses and thus you must weigh all facets of a car vis-a-vis your needs/desires to determine which car has value to you. I can't be much clearer.
the Mazda6. A friend has the Accord EX V6, and I like my car much more in virtually every respect. My wife has the Camry, and I like both the Accord and 6 better in most respects.
So I'm confined to 23k? That's ludicrous. If I can swing 23, I can scratch for 25-26k. If I'm scratching for 23, hold off 2-3 months...
Even within your narrow scope the Mazda6 and WRX pop out immediately. Neither are as nice inside as the Accord. The 6 doesn't have nearly the power of the Accord V6 either. But either one is a better car for me. Heck, I detest VW after two years of ownership, yet I'd opt for a Jetta GLI or 1.8T over an Accord. I still get fun handling, a few nice features, 4 doors, decent interior/trunk space. I'd rather save up 2-3k and just opt for the better car in that whole arena: the TSX.
BTW, if you ask around the VW Jetta area you'll discover I'm not a Honda fan, so the fact that I like the TSX so much speaks volumes. I'm overtly prejudiced against Hondas yet the TSX won me over through and through. RWD and some extra grunt, even for 5k more on the msrp, would have led to me buying one.
I did say "virtually" every respect, not all respects. Honda does make some nice engines, but since there's no V6 manual, I'm much happier with my car. Besides, I'd usually choose an i4 over a heavy V6 in FWD car. That's not a good comparison. I'd love to see the TSX's great engine in a lighter vehicle. In regards to the interior (and this goes for the TSX too), I think the Mazda's is less upscale yet just as appealing.
You may like Champaign, but I'd rather have a really good beer.
" .. Even within your narrow scope the Mazda6 and WRX pop out immediately. Neither are as nice inside as the Accord. The 6 doesn't have nearly the power of the Accord V6 either. But either one is a better car for me. Heck, I detest VW after two years of ownership, yet I'd opt for a Jetta GLI or 1.8T over an Accord. I still get fun handling, a few nice features, 4 doors, decent interior/trunk space. I'd rather save up 2-3k and just opt for the better car in that whole arena: the TSX.
Accord is nicer and much faster than Mx6. Had VW but it was terrible for 2 years would buy it over Accord. But wait save up an get slower TSX Because it is a better car. This is the guy that harps on performance and handling.
First I agree the TSX is a great car, just a tad sluggish.
If I understand the Blue guy's hierachy:
Mx6 < Accord v6 < VW < TSX
All I can say is the VW much have been a blast when it wasn't in the shop; reliability is evidently not a prime metric for you.
Cheers ,the Chariots are lining up and the participants are deciding on their true alegience
Um, no I'd place the 6, Jetta, WRX and definitely the TSX above an accord. Straightline acceleration is not imperative for me to enjoy a car. I love old miatas and they're slow as molasses running uphill with a strong headwind.
Why is this such a hard concept? Straightline power = useless to me if I dislike other aspects of the car. The Mazda6 is decidely slower than an Accord but in my experience it's a heckuva a lot more fun to drive and an all-around nicer car when everything's considered. Mustangs and Camaros are crazy fast. I wouldn't own one if someone offered to sell me an SVT for $100 and I had to promise to drive it daily for 3 years.
Why not just turbo and nitro a Civic with an Integra GS-R engine? Get 750 HP running through the front wheels. Yee-ha! Not my bag.
BTW, even after my experience with the Jetta, I'd still take a car that's troublesome (I did buy a BMW afterall) over a car with legendary reliability. Soul and fun are more important to me than appliance-like predictability.
Now can we stop going on and on about this? The TSX is a great car and I'll point as many people as I can toward it.
I agree with you that each of these cars may be for fun to drive, but just like you said that the MZ6 is the better all around car when all things are considered, I think most buyers would argue on that point that the Accord is the better balanced vehicle. But to each his own.
". If I'm scratching for 23, hold off 2-3 months... "
Well if I was in a situation that I could save up $3000 in excess income in a short 2 to 3 months I would be in a TSX right now. Unfortunately $3000 of free cash flow takes me quite a bit longer than that. Oh well. We are approaching a vehicle purchase from two different economic standpoints, I guess.
Thanks for responding. One thing we do agree on is that the TSX is an awesome car. Have fun with your BMW.
The S2000 engine is waaay more expensive to build than the K24 in the TSX, and it really does not fit the intended character of the TSX. Plus, it spins the wrong way.
It would make more sense in the RSX-R, but again the cost thing...
That's what I used to think, but apparently it is not the case. The D series is the only current engine that rotates counter-clockwise. In fact, according to discussions at TOV, the F20c in the S2000 is nothing like the old F series engines. Some report that there is little difference between the K20 and the F20c except for the head and tuning.
The JDM Euro Type R model uses a 220 hp version of the K20, but it is a much lighter, less luxurious model than the TSX. It's stripped to run fast. I believe Kyfdx is correct in that the K24 is better matched for the TSX.
Some folks speculate that the K24 could be tuned for much greater output at higher RPMs. 7,100 is fairly mundane by Honda standards. With a higher redline, the engine might produce as much as 250 horsies.
I'm not one of those people. The long stroke of the K24 means that the pistons are moving seriously fast. Someone reported that a Honda engineer was proud of the TSX's K24 because it set a new record for piston speeds in a production model (faster than the 8,900 rpms in the S2K?). If that's true, it may be close to maxxed out without resorting to forced induction.
Eco - I'm not an engineer either. However, it stands to reason that, with the engine spinning in the opposite direction, most everything else would have to be reversed as well. Anything that runs off the engine (belts, for example) would need to be reworked. Then there's the transmission... It gets expensive.
This is becoming less of an issue, though. Honda is moving toward making all their engines rotate clockwise. This would allow them to sell their engines to other companies (most others use a clockwise rotation).
Comments
redkey -- I understand your argument, but I had never seen the two cars compared before, and it just took me by surprise.
This is a strong endorsement indeed.. I am not doubting the reviewer as the 2003 Accord has 27% more rigid chassis(if I recall correctly) and better engine than the previous models.
About the ride/handling compromise, has anyone here driven both 2003 Accord and BMW 325i without sport suspension and what are the subjective impressions about handling and ride quality ?
And, if you're comparing mechanical features (as opposed to luxo bits), the TSX is the one that ends up looking "bare-bones." But again, since there's little commonality, comparing to two is a mostly wasted effort.
http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=15&article- - _id=3615
On paper, yes maybe they are two highly different cars but many real people (ie: those who actually looking to buy a car and drive it every day, not car geeks who debate 0-60 times and dyno) who look at the cars in their price range and go from there. I for one love the idea of the WRX and think it is a blast to drive. On the other hand I love the luxury touches of the TSX. I have yet to decide which I like better.
Take a look at clubwrx.com and clubtsx.com, I think you'd be surprised how many of those guys have compared the cars.
What do you honestly think I'd say about a nose-diving, understeering, FWD family sedan with 16s that squeals on an off-ramp going on 60? That's a dog in my book.
BTW, I drive a 330i with performance package. So you figure out what my barometer is for a car to have decent handling.
Cowboy, sorry but performance does not equate to straight speed. Pull out what ever defintiion you want. It's one component of what makes a car entertaining. The Miata has very little power but it offers RWD, a nimble chassis and handling that's sublime. I'd call that a far better performer than a simple press-the-gas-pedal and go V6 accord.
To each his own. Straight speed to me is useless if the car wallows, tilts, squeals and falls all over itself in the corners. If we all just wanted straight speed, we should pick up an old mustang or camaro and drop in a V8.
regards,
kyfdx
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
Heck, I've cross-shopped the WRX with the TSX, which is why I simply don't see most folks narrowing their lists down to those cars as the two finalists. When it comes down to figuring out which car suits you best for day-to-day operation, the choice between them becomes more of a litmus test than a matter of degrees.
The Accord is all about balance (even more so than the TSX). It handles well, accelerates well, and rides well. It also has one of the best drivetrains available on ANY car. All with a world-class interior (for the price range) and reliability that can't be beat. To me, it is an excellent overall package.
blueguy has a tendency to exaggerate just a tad to make his points. at times i don't agree, but find his comments entertaining.
What did I honestly think you'd say? Well, let's just say I wasn't disappointed.
Anyway, if that's your position, then please explain the R&T comments and handling scores. They had amazingly high praise for the handling of a car that you characterize as a "dog".
Say what you want... I'll take my own opinion and that of Road and Track, since they clearly have some measure of objectivity that your assessment lacks. What's objectivity? It's the ability to recognize the reality that a car doesn't have to handle as well as a BMW 330i with performance package to be considered a good handling car.
And I'm not even remotely suggesting that the Accord is the right car for someone with your particular "sensibilities".
I believe this article also called this Beemer a dog, sort of, since this 4WD 3-series has a mandatory raised suspension, which is the opposite of the lowered sport suspension.
For a lot of people, this raised suspension is just right for them, especially to substitute a Mercedes sedan's ride comfort w/ better handling.
Sorry whatever is printed by the various car mags is useless to your personal tastes. Should I suddenly change my mind and rush out to buy an accord v6 because some guy at RT claims it's agood handler? My personal preferences be damned?
I'll take my own opinion and that of Road and Track,
Your opinion (and your spouse's) should be the only one that matters for a purchase. What a lackey at RT believes shouldn't influence your purchase.
since they clearly have some measure of objectivity that your assessment lacks. What's objectivity? It's the ability to recognize the reality that a car doesn't have to handle as well as a BMW 330i with performance package to be considered a good handling car.
That's not being objective! Objectivity and car tests don't mesh well. You could say that any car that hits 60 in under 7 seconds is fast but in reality you've subjectively chosen a number so all cars that fit your bill are now winners of a fast label because you made a choice that sub-7 seconds = fast.
I don't hide my subjectivity or claim to offer an objective viewpoint (an oxymoron coming from a human). An accord V6's handling ranks about a 5/10 on my scale. The TSX hits a 6. My BMW is maybe an 8 but more likely a 7. EVERY car is measured on the same scale. I don't cut a Focus slack because it's a subcompact. If it's a grin-inducing handler then god bless it. If it wallows like a pig (CTS), then it's gonna get rated as such vis-a-vis all cars. A prius is on the same road as a 911 turbo. They're measured on the same scale.
Sorry whatever is printed by the various car mags is useless to your personal tastes. Should I suddenly change my mind and rush out to buy an accord v6 because some guy at RT claims it's agood handler? My personal preferences be damned?"
So obviously you can't. Thanks for putting your opinion into perspective.
Actually I think the Accord V-6 6-speed ranks about a 9 and here is why
Performance: 0-60 6.2 very good ( can use 80-90% of time)
Handling: better than average ( max handling rarely used, 50-80% handling limits part of the time; most of the time a normal person uses less than 50% of handling capabilities; minimal factor) Better tires could improve! ; actually I have had a very good handling RDW M3 in the past.
Gas mileage: 21/30 excellent on regular about a 2 mpg effective more than premium.
space: very good back seat is a little small in Coupe
Utility: very good: decent size trunk, split fold down seats
Reliability: Honda quality very high
Braking: a little low, but acceptable
Resale: excellent
Features: Near Luxury, beats all competitors: heated seats, dual auto-climate, sunroof , cruise, electroluminescent gauges ( I hate red gauges), voice NAV: missing : memory seats, Xexon lights, real wood, rain sensing wipers, backup monitor, power passenger seat, charcoal air filter, 3 or 4 zone climate control.
Value: excellent.
Drive: FWD ; this is a topic for discussion but all around if you have any snow or ice even occasionally, RWD just doesn't work. I have had performance cars in both and granted RWD gives a weight balance closer to 50/50 instead of 60/40 you only notice the difference when driving at 90-100 of handling capabilities and that is not where most people drive!
Actually the Accord 6-speed V-6 is very high on my short list. One has to wonder why someone with a BMW would even participate on an Acura discussion board, unless they had buyers remorse or still weren't sure they made the right decision.
And you feel it's only BMW owners that do this?
I didn't say it was just them. But I have noticed that owners of certain makes get more defensive than others. There's usually a correlation between price and defensiveness. As the price of the car goes up, so to does the defensiveness of their owners. It's almost like they feel the need to prove to everyone that their car is worth the money and the rest of us are driving junk. I'm not saying all BMW owners are like this, but a lot of em are.
I bought the car because it was my dream car, and I loved it. But, you still get stereotyped. I think owners of BMW's, Mercedes, and Porsche for the most part have to put up with that. And I think on the whole, they are defensive about it.
regards,
kyfdx (not an a--hole)
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
Personally, I feel that it is in everyone's best interest to find out all the information available, ie Car Mags, and reviews. One needn't agree with the reviews, but it should provide a starting point to evaluate vehicles on each individual's independent need.
And yes, I do care what the Mags write. If not, then why would I read them, or for that matter, even be posting messages on a website that caters to those seeking objective information.
I think you have to be careful about generalizations. Your defense of your 911 has no bearing on anybody else.
Because I dug the TSX and I want it to do well. I encourage people to discover this great, high value little sport sedan. If I had to do it over again, I'd choose the same car. That doesn't mean I can't respect what a great car the TSX really is.
think it is a serious lack of judgement to rate all cars on the exact same scale just because they all ride on the same roads. This type of all-or-nothing thinking is not only very simple (and potentially dangerous), but fails to distinguish certain cars that are adept to certain characteristics.
When you look at a car you look at all its attributes. To say otherwise is not realistic. Laid before you are thousands of cars. They all have pluses and minuses.
I refuse to accept it's right to categorize cars and then judge them. I hate modifiers like, "For a family sedan, this is a great handling car." No way. As a car is it great handling? People pull this same garbage when reviewing movies or restuarants. For an action film it's really good. For a walk-in place it's good. No, in the scheme of ALL the competition, is it good?
Personally, I feel that it is in everyone's best interest to find out all the information available, ie Car Mags, and reviews. One needn't agree with the reviews, but it should provide a starting point to evaluate vehicles on each individual's independent need.
Try on every car for yourself. You won't know there's a gem out there that fits you perfectly until you experience it firsthand. No amount of writing by guys at RT will make an MR2 spyder's handling real to you. you must feel it for yourself. Based on stats the Altima could seem like a great car but once you sit inside it you discover the armrest just doesn't feel right. You need to feel it for yourself.
Firstly, what criteria do you have for a "good" car? Is a Toyota Camry any less of a car because it doesn't have the handling characteristics of a 3-series? Some may argue that the Camry is a better quality car, with less problems. Would you say that an MDX is a worse car than the great handling S2000? No. It depends entirely on what you're looking for (Space vs sportiness). In essence, you want a great handling car. And that is your criteria,and that is perfectly fine. But please don't generalize that that is the only thing that makes a "good" car. I'm currently seeking a half-ton pick up right now: do you think I care at all about handling characteristics? Would all Pick-ups be considered bad vehicles?
And modifiers are perfectly acceptable. When I'm in the mood for fast food, I would go to a Wendy's or MacDonald's, and no go to a fine dining restaurant. It is completely unfair to judge things on one basic level. If you are judging things for handling characteristics, then of course you will judge all cars on that criterion. Not all people will judge based on one characteristic.
Note: I agree with you whole heartedly that the TSX is indeed a choice vehicle. I drove one yesterday, and came away incredibly impressed. Mostly, I was impressed with it's polish and panache.
"Try on every car for yourself. You won't know there's a gem out there that fits you perfectly until you experience it firsthand. No amount of writing by guys at RT will make an MR2 spyder's handling real to you. you must feel it for yourself. Based on stats the Altima could seem like a great car but once you sit inside it you discover the armrest just doesn't feel right. You need to feel it for yourself. "
I agree - you must try every car for yourself. And you're right, no amount of writing will convince me otherwise. Please recall that I said that reviews can really help as a starting point, and that they can also open your eyes to potentially good and bad characteristics.
You and I appear to have very different approaches to evaluating a car.
Without clarification, the scale of review comments is lost. We'd end up with a handling scale of 1-10 with dumptrucks at a 1 and supercars at the top. On that scale, the ratings for any given family sedan might be .00232 higher or lower than those for a another car in its class. Try to make an intelligent verbal or written statement out of that.
It is very important to understand the audience/target market for a car. In addition to keeping scale in perspective, this leads to the value of a particular attribute. For example, good handling is a prized attribute for supercars, not so much for dumptrucks.
Perhaps many accidents on the road involving dump trucks could be eliminated if good handling were required for dump trucks.
What are you selling?
That's what I wrote.
But please don't generalize that that [handling] is the only thing that makes a "good" car.
I never wrote anything of the sort. Pull quotes where I said that.
And modifiers are perfectly acceptable. When I'm in the mood for fast food, I would go to a Wendy's or MacDonald's, and no go to a fine dining restaurant. It is completely unfair to judge things on one basic level. If you are judging things for handling characteristics, then of course you will judge all cars on that criterion. Not all people will judge based on one characteristic.
I never said I do that either. A quality cars has numerous parts that combine to make the driving experience special. I've frequently mentioned Goldilocks because that's what carbuying is like. You try out everything and when you slip into one that fits just right, you don't want to leave.
At no point did I write that a car's handling is the final determination of whether or not a car is quality or not. I wrote that that Accord V6 is a dog when it comes to handling, that I'd rate it about a 5 on a scale of 1-10 for handling and that I'd choose a myriad of other cars over it. But at no juncture did I write that a car's handling prowess was the final factor in making a purchase. So as to avoid anyone making more assertions about me rating handling as the only characteristic of worth: all cars have pluses and minuses and thus you must weigh all facets of a car vis-a-vis your needs/desires to determine which car has value to you. I can't be much clearer.
What other cars would you choose over
Accord V6 @$23,000
or
Accord EX-L I4 @$21,000
What cars would YOU choose in those price ranges that you find to be better vehicles for handling or for total package?
Just wondering...
or
Accord EX-L I4 @$21,000
So I'm confined to 23k? That's ludicrous. If I can swing 23, I can scratch for 25-26k. If I'm scratching for 23, hold off 2-3 months...
Even within your narrow scope the Mazda6 and WRX pop out immediately. Neither are as nice inside as the Accord. The 6 doesn't have nearly the power of the Accord V6 either. But either one is a better car for me. Heck, I detest VW after two years of ownership, yet I'd opt for a Jetta GLI or 1.8T over an Accord. I still get fun handling, a few nice features, 4 doors, decent interior/trunk space. I'd rather save up 2-3k and just opt for the better car in that whole arena: the TSX.
BTW, if you ask around the VW Jetta area you'll discover I'm not a Honda fan, so the fact that I like the TSX so much speaks volumes. I'm overtly prejudiced against Hondas yet the TSX won me over through and through. RWD and some extra grunt, even for 5k more on the msrp, would have led to me buying one.
You may like Champaign, but I'd rather have a really good beer.
" .. Even within your narrow scope the Mazda6 and WRX pop out immediately. Neither are as nice inside as the Accord. The 6 doesn't have nearly the power of the Accord V6 either. But either one is a better car for me. Heck, I detest VW after two years of ownership, yet I'd opt for a Jetta GLI or 1.8T over an Accord. I still get fun handling, a few nice features, 4 doors, decent interior/trunk space. I'd rather save up 2-3k and just opt for the better car in that whole arena: the TSX.
Accord is nicer and much faster than Mx6. Had VW but it was terrible for 2 years would buy it over Accord. But wait save up an get slower TSX Because it is a better car. This is the guy that harps on performance and handling.
First I agree the TSX is a great car, just a tad sluggish.
If I understand the Blue guy's hierachy:
Mx6 < Accord v6 < VW < TSX
All I can say is the VW much have been a blast when it wasn't in the shop; reliability is evidently not a prime metric for you.
Cheers ,the Chariots are lining up and the participants are deciding on their true alegience
Why is this such a hard concept? Straightline power = useless to me if I dislike other aspects of the car. The Mazda6 is decidely slower than an Accord but in my experience it's a heckuva a lot more fun to drive and an all-around nicer car when everything's considered. Mustangs and Camaros are crazy fast. I wouldn't own one if someone offered to sell me an SVT for $100 and I had to promise to drive it daily for 3 years.
Why not just turbo and nitro a Civic with an Integra GS-R engine? Get 750 HP running through the front wheels. Yee-ha! Not my bag.
BTW, even after my experience with the Jetta, I'd still take a car that's troublesome (I did buy a BMW afterall) over a car with legendary reliability. Soul and fun are more important to me than appliance-like predictability.
Now can we stop going on and on about this? The TSX is a great car and I'll point as many people as I can toward it.
I agree with you that each of these cars may be for fun to drive, but just like you said that the MZ6 is the better all around car when all things are considered, I think most buyers would argue on that point that the Accord is the better balanced vehicle. But to each his own.
". If I'm scratching for 23, hold off 2-3 months... "
Well if I was in a situation that I could save up $3000 in excess income in a short 2 to 3 months I would be in a TSX right now. Unfortunately $3000 of free cash flow takes me quite a bit longer than that. Oh well. We are approaching a vehicle purchase from two different economic standpoints, I guess.
Thanks for responding. One thing we do agree on is that the TSX is an awesome car. Have fun with your BMW.
It would make more sense in the RSX-R, but again the cost thing...
kyfdx
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
That's what I used to think, but apparently it is not the case. The D series is the only current engine that rotates counter-clockwise. In fact, according to discussions at TOV, the F20c in the S2000 is nothing like the old F series engines. Some report that there is little difference between the K20 and the F20c except for the head and tuning.
The JDM Euro Type R model uses a 220 hp version of the K20, but it is a much lighter, less luxurious model than the TSX. It's stripped to run fast. I believe Kyfdx is correct in that the K24 is better matched for the TSX.
Some folks speculate that the K24 could be tuned for much greater output at higher RPMs. 7,100 is fairly mundane by Honda standards. With a higher redline, the engine might produce as much as 250 horsies.
I'm not one of those people. The long stroke of the K24 means that the pistons are moving seriously fast. Someone reported that a Honda engineer was proud of the TSX's K24 because it set a new record for piston speeds in a production model (faster than the 8,900 rpms in the S2K?). If that's true, it may be close to maxxed out without resorting to forced induction.
This is becoming less of an issue, though. Honda is moving toward making all their engines rotate clockwise. This would allow them to sell their engines to other companies (most others use a clockwise rotation).