Acura TSX vs Acura TL

merc1 · October 2003

Well I wouldn't trust Automobiles numbers on weight because they made the same type of weight errors on the E55,M5,S-Type R, RS6 comparo. I'd always go by the manufacturers numbers first, or at least Car and Driver, as they do actually weigh every car during it's time with them.

Automobile magazines test numbers are also suspect for one simple reason, they rarely actually "test" cars in the same manner as Road and Track and Car and Driver do. They clocked the E55 at 5.0 seconds from 0-60, at least a half second slower than everybody else. Automobile Mag is one those ride and drive type deals, they're not the most experienced testers. If (?) there are any other sources that say that TSX is faster than the IS300 in passing from 30-50 or 50-70 then I might believe it, but not from Automobile, they aren't seasoned "testers" when it comes to gettting the actual numbers.

M

uncledavid · October 2003

AUTOMOBILE's 0-60 times and other stats agree pretty well with published stats for just about every car they tested. So, I see little reason not to trust their numbers (the conclusions they drew in that article are a whole different issue).

merc1 · October 2003

That simply isn't true for all of the cars they've reviewed. There are more than a few examples in which they don't get the same numbers as the other mags do. With the TSX they might have been correct. My point is that they more often than not simply publish manufacturers numbers and they rarely actually "test" anything. Look back through some of their issues prior to the last 8-10 months, they hardly ever tested anything themselves as far as the numbers go.

I'm curious, what does Car and Driver say about the TSX and the IS300 in passing? If they are say the same thing then I'd believe it.

M

uncledavid · October 2003

Well, I hate to disappoint you, but Car and Driver got the most optimistic numbers for the TSX of any major auto mag. If you want to trust C & D more than AUTOMOBILE, than you can't even argue that the IS300 is faster off the line.

C & D reported a 0 -60 of 7.2 seconds for the TSX, the exact same figure they got for the IS300. The TSX and IS300 were close to dead even in the quarter mile as well. The TSX did it in 15.6, the IS300 in 15.4. This is all in the July 2003 issue. They do report the 50 - 70 MPH times for the TSX, but not the IS300.

Do I believe those numbers? No. I think they seriously overestimate the TSX's performance. I think AUTOMOBILE's 8.1 seconds is more realistic. But, the point is, two of the three main auto mags concluded that the TSX offered performance that was competitive with the IS300.

I still think my original conclusion was accurate. The TSX is going to be quite a bit slower off the line, and slower overall, but as fast (and perhaps faster) at highway passing speeds.

Finally, whatever you think of AUTOMOBILE, the numbers they print in that particular issue are very consistent with EDMUNDS, Motor Trend, and other trustworthy sources.

merc1 · October 2003

Like I said earlier, Automobile is a crap shoot when it comes to actual testing. Yes I'd trust C&D more for consistancy. I didn't say they were perfect, but they are more consistant than Automobile, that was my original point.

Lastly, whats the point of saying the TSX is faster from 30-70 when it's the slower car overall, it pointless. Didn't say the TSX wasn't competitive, I said it wasn't faster you like you're claiming it is.
Besides we're not talking about a gaping difference here in the first place. What you're comparing is like saying one car will do 150mph, when everything else is quicker to 100 mph, its matterless.

M

fdefulvio · October 2003

Take it outside ladies. You've beat this topic to death, and this is not the forum for it anyway.

uncledavid · October 2003

fdefulvio -The point here is the capabilities of the TSX. Many posters might want to opt for the TL, simply because of the assumption tha the TSX is underpowered.

Merc1 - In about 18 consecutive posts, I concluded that the TSX was not as fast as IS300 or most other cars in the class. Exactly where did I claim it was faster overall? What I did say was that once the cars get moving, the TSX was just as fast, and it is. Once the four gets moving, it is about as fast as many of the six-cyl in the class.

All this sprung from an earlier post by somebody who drove the TSX and TL, and concluded that the TSX lacked performance on the highway. That is simply not true. It is as fast as some of the other "fast" cars in this class (i.e., the IS300) once it gets on the highway.

And, btw, we're not talking about going to 150 mph or 100 mph, we're talking about speeds that everybody drives in a day-to-day basis. I'd wager that there more EDMUNDS posters every day who merge onto a highway or pass into the left lane than posters who need to go from a dead stop to sixty miles an hour.

The problem with the TSX, and something that might cause some to opt for the TL instead, is that it doens't move off the line quickly. However, at passing speeds, the TSX (like a lot of high reving 4-cyls cars) is competitive with vehicles that have far more torque.

merc1 · October 2003

Ok then we're done because:

"In about 18 consecutive posts, I concluded that the TSX was not as fast as IS300 or most
other cars in the class."

Thats what I said from the beginning. I made the analogy about 150mph because imo it's about as irrelvant as claiming the TSX is faster than the IS300 from 30-70, when they're so close anyway, with the IS300 still being the overall faster car. Lets just agree to disagree ok?

M

uncledavid · October 2003

You just concluded that the IS300 and TSX were reasonably close to each other at highway speeds, which is exactly what I've been arguing from the start. And, I don't think that is irrelevant at all. The main issue here is that the perceived lack of power in the TSX is not going to be felt at highway speeds, where it offers performance that rivals some six-cyl engines. Torque is going to have a bigger impact around town (C & D's results, which are really not believable, not withstanding).

So, a potential owner debating TSX vs. TL should realize that most signficant issue with the less expensive TSX will be at stop-and-go traffic around town. On the highway, the TSX is actually pretty quick.

midnightcowboy · October 2003

against the IS300;
that immediately implies the TSX is a pretty stout car. Debating a TSX against an IS300 is a pretty moot point when that puts EITHER far ahead of the competition.

uncledavid · October 2003

True. Although, again, I would acknowledge that the IS300 offers superior performance overall.
And, when the numbers come out, I think we'll find the newly redesigned TL offers advantages over both vehicles.

colinz · October 2003

i just got a 2003 TL base edition and my neighbor got a TSX. which one of these cars is faster? i know the TSX is pretty quick but the TL is a v6....does that make any difference? can you guys comment on the TSX against the 2003 TL and tell me what is better on the TL or what is better on the TSX. I like my 2003 TL but if the 4cylinder TSX is really that quick....maybe i should've gotten a TSX. please comment on the 2003 TL versus the TSX. thanks

uncledavid · October 2003

The TSX is at the bottom of the class in torque and sheer acceleration and the TL is somewhere in the middle. So, I'd say a 2003 TL will be quite a bit faster than the 2004 TSX. It won't handle as well, and it is missing some features that are on the TSX (side airbags, voice activated nav, etc). But, the TL will definitely be a good deal faster.

oniac · October 2003

Guys. I have a question. How could a 4 banger be stronger/faster at highway speeds than a 6 cylinder whether it's an I6 or a V6 ? I thought that it's the opposite where a 4 banger like a TSX for example would beat a similar HP I6 or V6 on a 0-60, but when it comes to passing speeds or downshifting at 50-60 mph from 4th to 3rd gear is where a 6 would be more powerful. I thought that downhsifting from 4th to 3rd on a 4 banger at 50-60 mph would cause the owner of that 4 banger to be picking up it's engine parts on the road.

uncledavid · October 2003

Torque is primarily determined by displacement and number of cyls. A high-torque six cyl (like the 240 HP Honda V6) will always move off the line quicker than 4-cyl.

Now, if you get a powerful reving high, so that you get into the sweet spot of its' powerband, it can give you performance than competes with bigger engines.

merc1 · October 2003

It's all in all how you like your power, I wouldn't want to have rev the TSX or any other entry-lux/sport sedan that hard to get a few tenths a second difference in passing times. I'd prefer the smoother operation of a I6.

M

varmint · October 2003

"Torque is primarily determined by displacement and number of cyls."

I'm being picky with this, but air induction and bore/stroke ratios also have significant roles in torque production.

Oniac - Gearing, weight, and a host of other things will determine how fast a car will accelerate. The "power" generated by the engine is only half the battle. Explaining it in more detail would take a few pages.

"I thought that downhsifting from 4th to 3rd on a 4 banger at 50-60 mph would cause the owner of that 4 banger to be picking up it's engine parts on the road."

Well... that depends on the engine and gearing. Sound familiar? A downshift to 3rd from 50-60 mph isn't a big deal. Even a downshift from 50-60 to 2nd may be possible a few select cars. Any shift that results in the next gear revving the engine higher than redline would cause a problem.

bodble2 · October 2003

I remember some '70s vintage Corvettes (or maybe older), with the "Rock Crusher" 4-speed manual, can go up to about 63 mph in 1st gear.

merc1 · October 2003

I think the Lamborghini Murcielago is capable of the same feat today.

M

midnightcowboy · November 2003

than TSX. The 6-speed TL is 20/30 while the 6-speed TSX is 21/29 . Lower gearing in the TSX?

stickguy · November 2003

Yup, that's the reason. The TSX buzzs a whole lot higher on the highway. Probably about 700 RPM=/- difference at cruising speeds.

It would be nice if Acura used the 6 speed box more efficiently, with a deeper 6th gear for more relaxed (and efficient) cruising. If I really need to pass or pull a hill, I can drop down to 5th.

Gearing is also the reason the AT TSX gets 2-3 more mpg on the highway.

roadrunnernsx · December 2003

A limiting factor on the TSX 0-60 times is that the 2-3 shift occurs just before 60 and you lose that precious several tenth's of a second.
Stickguy is so right on the 6th gear being too
low. I think the 6 spd should be geared to cruise and get around 35mpg.
Honda does pride itself on being "green" yet won't raise the 6th gear ratio. That has puzzled me to no end.
Does the IS300 pull through 60 in 2nd gear? Owners please fill me in. Thanks.

goodegg · March 2005

Don't get me wrong. I respect the TSX. I drove the TSX before buying a TL. The TSX seemed like a toy power-wise compared to the TL. With all the spirited options out there I couldn't see buying an underpowered car that I had to constantly red-line to get power.

You make it sound like a TL is flat-footed and plods through the turns. Both these cars are FWDs based on the Accord. Their handling dynamics aren't a whole lot different, but I felt even with the added weight of the V6, the TL more than makes up for it with sheer power. Its not like my daliy drive is comprised of total slalom to and from work and appointments and I need a lighter higher revving ride like a TSX.

Its hard to really jam a car during a test drive so my TSX trial may have been less than optimum, but first impressions mean a lot to me, and the first impression I got driving the TL after the TSX was WOW - I want this one.

pat · July 2005

ljwalters1 · July 2005

The TL is a grown-up TSX. Yes, the TSX has some good features that are lacking in the TL (turn-signal in the side mirrors and fold down back seats), but nothing really major. The TL is faster, more powerful, bigger and IMO better looking. :shades: Both come with loads of features and nice interiors. Obviously, the TSX and TL aren't really competing with each other, and that's the real problem. The TL can hold its own against the competition - the TSX can't and it comes down to torque.

I have a TL, and I know the #s say it's poor on low-end torque. Frankly, the #s lie, but I'm not car saavy to be able to explain why. Maybe it's that the hp makes up for it, or the overall torque make enough at low RPMs. I bet a lot has to do with the quick pick-up of the clutch. One inch off the floor and you're in gear. Because of this, the TL can hold its own with the G35, BMW 3 series and will hold its own with the IS. I'm not saying it's faster or sportier than those cars, but it's close enough that the TLs refinements and value come into play.

The TSX can't overcome that lack of torque. :sick: Again, I don't know why, but it can't. For that reason, I'd take a VW Passat or Volvo S40 T5 over the TSX. All priced about the same, the Passat is slightly faster (the new one I hear is a lot faster), but has lower end torque to beat the TSX off the line and keep city driving fun, and is a bit more luxurious. The Volvo I mention is not more luxurious, but is so much quicker that I don't think it matters.

The TL market are people that want a compromise between a useful, good-looking , quick and luxurious car. The TSX market is for those who want a luxurious car that's not slow and has a fancy nameplate on the hood.

Now that should get this forum rollin'!!!

habitat1 · July 2005

..that I would see is the 4 cylinder vs. 6 cylinder engine. Besides the initial performance advantage, if you are planning on keeping the car for 100,000+ miles, I believe the TL 3.2 liter 6 cylinder will last longer.

This is mostly my gut opinion. I know Honda 4 cylinders have a decent reputation. But in 1995, I ponied up an extra $3,000 for a no-option Maxima SE over a well optioned Altima GXE. After 154,000 miles, the Maxima engine is as smooth and quick as the day I drove it off the lot. My service manager indicated that the extra money I spent in 1995 was a good investment - that the 4 cylinder Nissan engines just can't match their 6 clinder ones for long term durability.

The best car I've owned to date was my 2002 S2000 with it's high strung 9,000 rpm 240 horsepower 4 cylinder engine. But it's a 2,800 lb sports car with a maximaum payload of 400 lbs. For a family sedan, I think 6 cylinders is the minimum requirement.

delmar1 · July 2005

I own both a 2005 TL and 2005 TSX. What I would say is that it is unfair to say which is better...as they are two different classed cars. It is like asking is my BMW 750Li better than my TL (you cannot compare as one is a 360hp V-8 for starters).

Regarding the comment regarding that the TSX cannot compete against its peers...I disagree. Natural peers would be such as the Lexus IS300, Volvo S40 T5, and Audi A4 1.8. I could go indepth with all (but that is for the TSX board)...but common thread is that each competitor's price would easily be $6k+ for a similarily equiped car (making the price similar to the TL and that is a easy decision). Many do not have the same performance orientation, reliability, or available features.

Regarding torque....I can say that all the above mentioned have lower horsepower than the TSX (IS300 with 215hp...Volvo with 218hp). Yes the Acura has a lower torque than the others, but I can assure you that the TSX is indeed nimble with the excellent Acura powertrain including VTec and drive by wire. It actually feels more nimble than my TL. Doesn't matter what it says on paper...it has enough to get steaming along.

Perhaps pull out the Consumer Report guide on cars and you will see a head to head comparison of the TSX to A4, Subaru Legacy, and Volvo S40. Guess which one came out 'recommended'...the TSX. As stated...the TSX is the best balance between sportiness and roominess.

So the question is which car do I prefer. I will be honest to say that I reach for the TL keys before the other two. However...I still bought a TSX and I still very much enjoy driving the car (I might like it better than my Big Money Wasted )

Why did I buy a TSX? We saw it driven around France during a vacation and liked the style. We liked the punchy size...styling...and general utility of the car (trunk is as large as the TL and it gets larger when the rear seats are folded down). Also...didn't want two TLs in the same garage...but still wanted the amenities of an Acura at $6k+ less.

All an individual choice. TL and TSX each have their reason for existance.

mldj98 · July 2005

So you'll take the Passat, Volvo S40 T5 over the TSx huh?
I hope you wallet is fat...for after two years it will be up on that hoist allot more than the TSX...but don't believe me....read the articles, magazines, expert (so called) opinions...everything I have read has had one car on top...the TSX...

I don't know about you...but IMO when most people buy cars they buy it as an over all packaged based on their needs...not just one item...Torque for example...if we were to buy cars based on that then there are many cars out there that have more torque then all of the cars we have listed here...hell I would go buy a NSX if I wanted to go 180 mph!!

I read all of these posts from people saying that this car is .01 faster that this car...
Now I am heavy on the pedal but when was the last time you ran the 1/4 mile in your TL? or any car for that matter? What do you think would happen if you ran your car everyday like they do in all of these test? It wouldn't last for very long, I don't care what type of car it is or who makes it....

Now as far as the TL vs TSX as the member posts above...you shouldn't be comparing the 2 as far as the specs go...they are two different models...the models fall into the food chain and in the Acura world the chain starts with the RSX, then the TSX, then the TL and then finally the RL...if all of these models were built to be the same then there would be no food chain...
How can we compare a 4 to 6 cylinder? It's like comparing the Devil Rays to the Yankees???

If you want performance out of the TSX push the pedal hard...at around 4000 rpm you neck with move back...maybe not as much as the TL (again 4 vs 6)...but compared to what else is out there the TSX holds it's own very well thank you...

What you have to ask yourself when comparing the 2 is does the TSX satisfy your needs... or does the TL....it's not rocket science....one just happens to cost about 5-6K more....so does the added features of the TL make up for the extra $$$?
Again it's an individual choice as always....what fits your needs and at what price...

IMO to sum it up...everything you read about the performance test in these cars are a basis to hopefully help make an informed decision...if YOU as a person are going to take this car out on a daily basis and conduct all those manuvers for yourself then by all means...rock on! But for most people to do the daily commute, an occassional road trip, many even a mountain run (if you have one near you), then I think either car is best in EACH individual class...and the real question is this...when you make that formula one ride to the store to get that gallon of milk which car really fits the bill? Either one is going to look sharp in the parking lot....

How's that for rollin'!!!

frisconick · July 2005

Excellent post delmar! The TSX is a huge value. You get a BMW like car for $10,000 less. You get over 200 hp in a small car, and yes it can scoot. The TL is a completely different animal, the comparison is not really fair. Yes the V-tec is a superior engine to all competitors. :P

ljwalters1 · July 2005

You have a TL, TSX and a 7-Series?!? :confuse: Man, you like your sedans!!!

Regarding V-tech, I know Acura talks about it a lot, but I always figured it was just a technology that allowed you to rev higher than otherwise. Using it allows the torque band to be higher, and I guess allows Acura to get better gas mileage during regular driving when you're not revving the engine that high :confuse:

Am I close to being right?

If so, I don't really see the big deal to V-tech. I'd rather have low-end torque than high-end torque.

delmar1 · July 2005

Yes...I have the 3 cars mentioned. We are not into SUVs or minivans...ever. All wholly owned and the BMW 7 was bought through a car allowance...which might be traded in for a Mercedes SLK (my wife's hope).

The V-Tech is no BIG deal as I see it as a marketing label. What I do like is how the Acura / Honda engines perform to my needs and expectations. Label or no label.

Yes...it would be great to have low-end torque...agreed. Just that I still find the TSX fills the niche need. Just as some may have a Xterra to haul their scuba gear...the TSX is a great everyday car that gets a lot done and is a great drive. I can drive it to the ball game and easily pop in and out without worries. I can go to HomeDepot..fold down the rear seats and haul all kinds of junk.

I could go on regarding specific comparisons of the TSX and TL. However...if there is anyone out there interested in specific comps...just let me know.

frisconick · July 2005

The V-tech gets excellent mileage. The TL gets over 30 mpg in freeway driving, that is astounding for a 270 hp, and an over 3,500 pound car.

rihoops · July 2005

$$$$ is the big difference for most people!

People might want the TL, but they drive the TSX and realize it is a sweet car in its own way.

Couple that with an 8K difference and people buy the TSX.

frisconick · July 2005

I have driven both cars and I believe the 8k difference is worth it. However, the TSX is a great car, and would be greater with more hp.

rko2 · July 2005

In regard to the comment about a Volvo S40 T5 being quicker than a TSX, I would have to disagree. While it may have more torque than a TSX, the torque is distributed to 4 wheels. I have driven both cars (and own a TSX) with manual transmissions, and the TSX seems quicker off the line. If you are buying a Volvo S40 T5 on the basis of better torque and 4-wheel drive over the TSX, you should be buying a Subaru Legacy 2.5GT, IMO.

I agree with the other postings, the TSX is the best buy amongst the appropriate competitors. If you really want a manual and a fun car to drive that has practical functionality as well, you can't go wrong.

ljwalters1 · July 2005

While it may have more torque than a TSX, the torque is distributed to 4 wheels

How does 4 v 2 affect the torque issue? I'm not disputing the statment, I just don't know enough to understand.

Also, the S40 T5 also comes in FWD. That's the version I tested.

frisconick · July 2005

Plus the TSX is a very attractive looking car, the more I see it on the road, the more I like it.

delmar1 · July 2005

I don't know enough about it...but I am guessing that there is some torque loss through all the converters perhaps? I may be incorrect...but isn't torque measured not at the wheel level...but what the engine can produce?

acraandy · July 2005

My experience driving both the TSX and TL (I sell them) is that the TSX is a bit more nimble feeling. It has more of a sports-car feel. However, the fact that the horses show up so late in the rev takes away from the rush of massive acceleration.
The TL feels more well-refined and when you step on it, it goes. The 70 extra HP is a definite bonus, even with it's extra weight.

When it comes to looks, I think the TL is one of the best looking cars on the road (IMHO).

Both cars are unique looking and have similar features as far as safety and security. It comes down to how you like a car to feel. I would go to the dealer, take a spin in each and let the decision ride on the feel - as long as the price difference and your wallet are in agreement.

bodble2 · July 2005

" I think the TL is one of the best looking cars on the road (IMHO)."

You'd get no argument from me on that!

delmar1 · July 2005

Acraandy...welcome to the discussion.

I own both the 2005 TL and TSX (as I mentioned in previous posts...and I am not a dealer and not in the auto industry) and I totally agree with you. The TSX is more nimble feeling as it has some zip and it does have enough acceleration. I would compare the acceleration to an Audi A4...which isn't too shabby. A different driving experience...but both very fine.

Ride...I would say that the TSX has a little more visibility...not to say that the TL is driving blind-folded. And in some ways...the ride is a little more comfortable in the TSX as the TL is more sports tuned.

I highly recommend getting off the net...get out and drive both cars. Only way to determine your choice.

frisconick · July 2005

the ride is a little more comfortable in the TSX as the TL is more sports tuned.

I muched preferred the TL ride than the TSX, but the TSX ride is just fine, but I don't know what you mean buy sports tuned?

delmar1 · July 2005

What I meant is that the TSX may be a bit more comfortable in certain applications as the TL is more geared towards performance. That is...a bit firmer...but not jarring. The TL sits on lower profile tires and grips tight. Sports tuned...but not bone crushing like other competing cars.

The TSX is a little bit more absorbing...but still quite of bit of feedback from the road. I wouldn't go for 500 miles in a TSX for an extended drive...but on a day to day drive...it could be a little bit more softer ride.

However...I will be honest....I prefer my TL. I look forward to each drive. At the same time...I still very much enjoy my TSX.

frisconick · July 2005

I thought just the opposite. But love both cars.

delmar1 · July 2005

Yeah...straighten me out if I ever stray from the TL fan club.

Both the TL and TSX are excellent values and great performers. I recommend all to test drive both to determine your choices. I am fortunate to have both in the stable.

taxesquire · July 2005

I certainly hope at least 1 of them is a 6MT!!!

delmar1 · July 2005

Sadly...no...both AT. My wife and I share all our vehicles and she isn't into pecking through the gears through traffic. And worst of all....she is interested in purchasing a Mercedes SLK with an auto-tranny.

However...that is another difference with the TSX and TL. The TL auto shift patterns is more 'sports driven'. What I mean is that the 'grade logic' feature has it where it will downshift when rounding a curve...where it is anticipating you to punch the accelerator coming out of the curve...which sets up for a great acceleration blast. Great feature.

taxesquire · July 2005

Hmmm...my wife actually taught me to drive a stick, making her a rare breed (unfortuately). She's only driven my TL once, and had a bad experience 'cause she's not used to the clutch engaging so soon. I think it's great, and helps counteract the lack of low-end torque. Guess I'll need to be a gentleman and return the favor by giving her a lesson!

bodble2 · July 2005

" And worst of all....she is interested in purchasing a Mercedes SLK with an auto-tranny."

Hey, me too! :P I guess I've become lazy in my old age. And most of the time I'm really more interested in cruising in comfort and style, rather than be a hard-charger.

And regarding the shift algorithm of the TL, I'm not sure I like it 100%. If you round a city corner fast, and get back on the gas, it almost feels like the tranny would drop down a couple of gears, so you get a momentarily lull, and then, Bang, the revs shout up, and the car surges ahead! Not sure I like that. :sick:

delmar1 · July 2005

The shift algorithm of the TL...very enjoyable for my tastes. I like how it downshifts to grab a hold of the corners a bit more...and have the ability to pop-out of the corners with authority...if need be.

I say that the car surges ahead not only because of the down-shift...but because you are dealing with newer technology...where you have 'drive-by-wire' accelerator and you are sitting on 270hp. That is...the accelerator is not a mechanical linkage...but like the race cars where it is electronically controlled. So perhaps your foot is heavy and pounding down harder than necessary. Also..perhaps your other cars do not have 270hp and the pick-up of the TL.

As for the SLK...sure would be nice to have a little more sporty feel to go with the style.

Acura TSX vs Acura TL

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles