Have you recently purchased a new car or are you trying to and struggling to find affordable options? A reporter would like to speak with you; please reach out to [email protected] by 5/26 for more details.

Acura TSX vs Lexus IS 250



  • notjafonotjafo Member Posts: 63
    A lot of this is going to come down as a matter of taste - some people prefer the accord to the camry, and others the camry to the accord. Both are fine vehicles, but people will value different ride attributes.

    The only things that can be quantified are he value of things that we can easily price - leather v cloth, bluetooth, etc, we have an idea of what those should cost. For example, you can get bluetooth add-ons for about $50 if that matters, it just won't be integrated into the car nicely. Or you can replace the radio/cd, etc. Style is subjective.

    As for the new Civic - it is a great car, and the Si even greater. Truly deserving all of the attention and awards. But the Si only comes in a 2 door, and neither have some of the amenities and features that you can get on the TSX. You can't compare the inerior of the Civic to either he Accord or the TSX.

    As for really important feastures - except for the Accord EX, you can't get VSA on the Accord, and it just isn't available on the Civics, and that is a big safety issue. It will be there soon, Honda puts it on all their minivans, but not yet on all their cars.

    As for the Accord v the TSX - well, the price diffrence is alot closer than the TSX v IS250, similarly equipped. And I think the TSX was more fun. I didn't need all that additional space, but I also didn't want to have a useless back seat and trunk. I wanted a real 4 passenger car.

    I drove the IS250AWD - great car, lots of power to play with and it's there when you need it (if you can get used to the paddles) handled great. But it also felt smaller to me inside, and too cocooned with not enough visibility for me - it just wasn't what I wanted, and not enough to justify the substantial additional cost. Size wise, the IS splits the difference between the Civic and the TSX, though except for length it is a bit closer to the TSX, and while it has an inch more front legroom it gets that at the expense of 4 inches in the rear! Again, not what I wanted.

    As for money, just because I can afford something doesn't mean I have to spend it. For me, the TSX was fun to drive and came with the bonus of a great bang-for-the-buck that I didn't see or feel in the IS.

    I trust, and hope, you enjoy driving your IS for a long time, I just don't think I would have.
  • speedracer3speedracer3 Member Posts: 650
    So, the fact that I bought a TSX means I know nothing about cars?...that's a pretty silly statement,let's not get personal here, I never called you a liar, your idea of a great handling car is not the same as mine. You still have not giving me one reason to back up your statement in calling the the TSX overpriced. I am sure the Civic SI feels more nible and better handling. It's smaller and lighter, it's also not a luxury car. You are comparing apples to oranges. I am sorry, but there is nothing outdated about the TSX, even though it's based on the European Accord, Honda has made sure that the car is equipped with the latest techno gadgets and safety features.
  • fredvhfredvh Member Posts: 857
    Thanks for your comparison of the IS to the TSX but I would like you to clarify what you mean exactly by "the TSX performed very poorly on the test drive". I drove the TSX and found it very nice. My only major complaint was that the ride is harsh on bumpy or uneven roads. It is a very good buy for what you get in a sporty car. The TSX has won many awards for being a "Best Buy". Please explain how you were disappointed with the test drive of the TSX.
  • z71billz71bill Member Posts: 1,986
    I agree terms like "handling" and "ride quality" can mean different things to people.

    A Buick will soak up the bumps (soft ride) - but its not very good in the handling department.

    A Viper will just about knock your fillings loose on a bumpy road - but man will it corner.

    The measure of a sports sedan is how well does it soak up the bumps and still handle the corners.

    I am looking for a balance - good ride quality - firm but not harsh and the ability to take corners fast & still feel in control (limited body roll).

    The TSX IMO has a poor ride quality (I could feel every expanion joint in the road) and was downright harsh over bumps - but still had WAY too much body roll on turns. The steering was not very responsive. Its like Acura somehow got a Viper to handle like a Buick - which is the opposite of what I expected.

    The IS 250 handled the bumps in the road just fine - but had razor sharp steering -

    I also recall a very strange BUZZING noise coming out of the dash area behind the glove box - it was not a rattle - it sounded like maybe a power steering pump - as engine RPM increased the noise also grew louder. This noise was in both cars we tested.

    No car does everything - take your choice do you want GREAT performance or GREAT MPG - not many cars run 0-60 (I know there is more to performance that 0-60) in under 5 seconds and still get 30 MPG

    Not many cars ride very smooth and still corner like they are on rails -

    So look at it this way - the IS will out handle the TSX in the corners and still provide a better quality ride on bumpy roads.

    The only thing the TSX has over the IS 250 is price - sometimes you get what you pay for - this is one of those times.
  • waw40waw40 Member Posts: 39
    Informed car buyers go for the features they want (including available colors - I happen to be a Milano Red freak)/price combo, and they prioritize their preferences because there is no car in the world that could possibly satisfy everyone on the planet.
    Now, as to the topic in question - although Lexus has been often used for comparison as standard of luxury, especially interior, I have not heard it being used as a standard of sportiness - that has been reserved for the Bimmer (below the Ferrari price range that is...). In this context, I asked a friend of mine, an owner of BMWs for the past 15 years, to test a TSX and an IS 250 for me to help me with my decision and his verdict was decidedly in favor of the TSX (MT of course).
    As additional food for thought, let me quote from the April 2006 issue of Consumer Reports about the IS: " ride is jittery, handling not sporty."
  • z71billz71bill Member Posts: 1,986
    So you let a friend (BMW owner you say - OOOOO) and CR make your car buying decision for you? You must be a real car nut! Please tell us more about what your friend told you to do! I want to run right out and do the same thing - HOW COULD I GO WRONG!


    I did - the IS 250/350 is a good balance - nice ride - great handling. The TSX is a 2001 Accord DX with leather & Nav.

    So when is MR BMW trading in his car on a TSX? He could save $8,000 and have a larger truck!
  • lexus_jnlexus_jn Member Posts: 102
    If you asked me to help you to choose between TSX and BMW then I would take TSX in a heart beat :-)

    BMW performance is no doubt one of the best in the industry just like Lexus when refering to quality & comfort. However, poor reliability really hurts BMW reputation and that factor alone somehow leaves an open door for Lexus and Acura. In all fairness, Acura performance & handling are not up to the same level that you can use that to justify the prices offered by BMW and Lexus.
  • notjafonotjafo Member Posts: 63
    First you agree that much of this is a matter of opinion, then you denegrate the opinion of others. This is a waste of time and space. If you like the IS, buy it and drive it. If you like the TSX buy it and drive it. Just like the accord v camry the acura will have a firmer ride than the IS. This isn't a design flaw, it's design. But note further that these aren't purely comparable. You drove an AT TSX, which every review says is inferior in power to a MT, which I think most others here are talking about. Let's also not forget that the IS doesn't get directly compared to the TSX in C&D, etc because the IS doesn't fall into the category of "under 30K" that the TSX does even with Nav. On price, I think the TL is still less expensive than the IS and now we are talking about a much larger engine.

    And we haven't even begun to get into the issue of how much of the TSX ride and feel is due to the OEM tires....there are other posts related to that.
  • z71billz71bill Member Posts: 1,986
    Is that last post directed at me?

    Sure everyone has different needs and wants -

    At least I use my own experience - based on actual test drives - rather than using some magazine (CR - now there is a source for helping you find a sport sedan) or having some BMW owner tell me what I should do (why would anyone think that is a qualification is beyond me).

    Since the topic of this thread is after all "TSX VS IS" I expect a few disagreements - if we all just do as you say "If you like the IS, buy it and drive it. If you like the TSX buy it and drive it". Then why even have this topic in the first place?

    Just wondering -

    Why is there no IS 250/350 VS Camry topic? But there is one for Accord VS TSX?

    Why is there both an IS VS BMW and an IS VS TSX topic - but no TSX VS BMW thread?

    Why doesn't BMW (or MB or Lexus) have any 2006 model year front wheel drive 4 banger sports sedans?
  • haizmanhaizman Member Posts: 19
    Why is there both an IS VS BMW and an IS VS TSX topic - but no TSX VS BMW thread?

    Price positioning. People will always compare similarly priced (or "Classed") vehicles. Many people will also feel better about a purchase if it costs more (i.e. my wife wasting money on a Coach purse).

    I think it's a waste of time to fanboy an automobile. If you like your car and what it costs... that's all that matters. Everything else is subjective.
  • waw40waw40 Member Posts: 39
    We are spewing irony, aren't we?
    I didn't say I made my decision solely on either my friend's or the CR's report - those were just 2 of many factors. Since BMW is commonly regarded as standard of sportiness, I wanted to hear the long-time owner's opinion on how close/far from the standard both cars feel. I never had a BMW so I couldn't make that comparison myself even by a short test drive. If the opinion made you so upset, it is your problem - go ahead and enjoy your IS.
    Your statement that TSX is a 2001 Accord DX is nonsense; it is based on a European 2.4 Accord (they don't have Acura's there), not on American Accord. European cars have long had opinion of being more sporty and better handling than what used to be made for the American market and TSX, which was originally made to compete in that market, is a good example.

    Finally, I wouldn't ignore CR's opinion so lightly, on cars on any other product - your "test" can't even come close to what those guys do. For more information and a full CR test, look at the Nov 04 issue. However, that test was obviously done on a pre-2006 TSX version.
  • speedracer3speedracer3 Member Posts: 650
    It is obvious that handling is the only factor that you've used to purchase cars. To follow your logic, if the IS handles better than the TSX, and the Civic SI outhandles them all, why are you not driving a Civic SI?. There are many reasons people buy cars, handling is one of them. I think most TSX buyers have been swayed by the whole package. The price, sportiness, features. I have nothing against the IS, I think it is a nice looking car, but for the money the TSX was just a better package. Even if the IS handled better (I don't care, I didn't bother driving it), or was a smiggen faster, to me it was not worth the difference, nor was I gonna pay full price for it. If I am gonna spend $30K+ on a sport sedan, I'll get the real thing, and thats a BMW or an Audi, they are great handlers, my other car is an Audi 1.8T with a sport pkg.
  • notjafonotjafo Member Posts: 63
    Precisely - if you want comparisons to the BMW 330, the Infiniti G35, the Volvo S60 and Audi A4 look at the TL board - that's where the comp priced vehicle will be found, and I think the TL can be gotten for less than the IS250, even tho on the discussion boards it's the IS350 they compare the TL to. And now we're talking "best cars under $40K" not under $30K.

    There also isn't a performance version of the Camry to compare a Lexus to - have I missed a 6spd manual tranny version of the Camry?
  • z71billz71bill Member Posts: 1,986
    haizman - you hit the nail right on the head - when you said " People will always compare similarly priced (or "Classed") vehicles" Accord and TSX about the same price - about the same class.

    waw40 - I know the TSX is based on a European Accord - go read my prior post - was it the 2001 or 2002 model? I can't recall - either way it is an old design - could be why I think the 2006 Civic handles better and has about the same ride quality.

    speedracer3 - Not sure why you think handling is my only concern - its not - I want a balance - let me explain - I will use the Buick and Viper as examples (just like my prior post) but will fill in some detail so you can understand what I am saying.

    A Buick is tuned to give a smooth ride - it will glide over small bumps - nice and soft - some would even say it floats. The price you pay for this soft ride is a reduction in cornering & handling ability.

    A Viper has great cornering ability - it handles like a race car - but the ride is very harsh - even small bumps are felt - larger bumps or a bad road make the ride down right uncomfortable.

    Although I UNDERSTAND why some people want a Buick - and I also UNDERSTAND why some people want a Viper - I would rather have a vehicle that has more of a balance - somewhere in between - maybe slightly tilted to better handling but still has a comfortable ride.

    What I don't understand is why would anyone want a car with a harsh ride (tilted toward the Viper) but handles poorly (tilted toward the Buick) - Based on my test drives that is what you get with a TSX - crummy ride - crummy handling. What is the point?

    I see the same thing being posted - over and over and over - it always comes back to THE TSX COSTS LESS - ITS CHEAPER - but can anyone tell me what the TSX does better? (than the IS)

    Does it ride better? - NO

    Does it handle better? NO

    Does it stop (brake) better? NO

    Does it go faster 0-60 45-70? NO

    That comes back full circle - if you want a car that rides better, handles better, brakes better & goes faster the IS is your car.

    If you want to save money and don't care much about ride,handling braking of performance then the Accord is a good choice. Now that may be a 2001 European Accord based TSX - but its still an Accord.
  • waw40waw40 Member Posts: 39
    Japanese models made for Europe are not stale and are frequently updated to keep up with the market, so the model TSX is based on is not a 2001 model but an upgraded 2005 version - check the European sources.

    If you add IMOs to your NOs, I will be happy to concede that IS is the best car in its class for you). BTW, have you ever wondered why so many drivers and car experts, American and European, are of different opinion about the "crummy" TSX than you are?
  • cmschmiecmschmie Member Posts: 27
    Are your posts in regards to the 250 or the 350? If it's the 350 then I'll agree with your posts. However, for the 250 I am not so sure. I too have driven both cars (a TSX manual and an IS auto). Would like to drive an IS with manual transmission, but who the heck can find one?
    Car and Driver recently drove an IS250 manual (April '06) and the numbers may shock you.
    Braking (70-0): IS 170ft
    TSX 177ft (Feb '06)
    0-60: IS 7.1 sec
    TSX 7.2 sec (Not the big o' deal)
    5-60: IS 8.4 sec
    TSX 8.2 sec :surprise:
    Quarter Mile: IS 15.4 sec @ 90mph
    TSX 15.7 sec @ 91mph (Not that big o' deal)
    No info on IS for 50-70 but it probably is faster than the TSX, it has the torque of a V-6 to help there. The handling can be little subjective, but the OE tires on the TSX have received criticism before. Can be fixed with aftermarket wheel/tire combo (more on this in a moment)
    Ride quality is purely opinion.

    The reason's I chose the TSX over the IS250:
    1. What you get for the price. To get anywhere near this on the IS add at least $2000 to base price that is already higher than TSX (without navigation system)
    2. With the money I save I'll get aftermarket wheels and tires to upgrade handling and braking performance
    3. Build quality. Not that the Lexus is not built well, it is a Toyota. But, this IS is brand-spanking-new and there are bound to be a few problems to come up. (most probably with the keyless ignition)

    I really like the styling of both cars. The IS is one extremely good looker and whenever you see one on the road you gotta stop and stare for a little bit. The TSX has a more subdued styling (I personally like that), but if you're looking for one, they are not hard to find.

    This is my two-cents worth.
  • notjafonotjafo Member Posts: 63
    If money is no object why would anybody buy any IS? I'm sure that I could find a can that beats it in every category, so what if it costs $50K more.......

    Without imposing some constraint there is no basis for comparing anything - pick SOMETHING to hold constant.....
  • haizmanhaizman Member Posts: 19
    My wife test drove the IS, G35, 330, TL, Civic, Accord, and TSX. The reasons she decided on the TSX were practical ones like: 60/40 split (not found on the TL or other rear-wheeled), price/features ratio, gas mileage, intuitive nav system, smaller size, etc. Handling, speed, braking, were not on her list (although she thought that the TSX was pretty decent in most categories).

    Honda weirdly positions it's higher-end Accord a little too close to the TSX, considering this years numerous refinements (bluetooth, thicker glass, fog lights, faster nav, etc), it was pretty easy to pick it over the Accord for the same $$.

    Everyone will buy their car for their own personal reasons, speed, handling, or whatever. For most people, it's practical reasons that make the TSX a great choice. If I were a driving enthusiast, I would not even waste my time with these lower end vehicles (Crab vs Krab if you know what i mean!).
  • speedracer3speedracer3 Member Posts: 650
    We disagree on the crummy ride and crummy handling, and I am starting to think you either had a very short test drive with the TSX or you know less about cars that you boast to know. The ride on the TSX is very smooth for a sporty sedan. Take a hard corner on the TSX, as I've done many times and there is almost 0 body roll. The steering is very precise, I've done many high speed manuevers without losing one bit of control. I've had no complaints about the brakes, and I've had plenty of emergency brake situations, the car stops with plenty of confidence. The OEM tires do stink, but it has nothing to do with the dynamics of the car. On the flip side, the hanlding on my Audi is much sharper, but you pay for it with a jarring harsh ride. To me the TSX is the right combination of sport, luxury, and value. As I said before, if I was looking for a more hard core sport sedan, my vote goes with the Germans.
  • z71billz71bill Member Posts: 1,986
    Acura must be magic - they intro a car (TSX) in 2003 as a 2004 model and base it on a vehicle that is not even produced until 2005! How did they do that?

    This is what the Edmunds 2004 TSX overview says -
    "Although based on an existing European Honda, the TSX is an all-new car for the U.S. market" - I would think by existing they mean IT HAS ALREADY BEEN SOLD. The TSX has not had any major changes to the suspension since the 2004 model year - I guess the only way the 2006 TSX could be based on the 2005 European Accord would be if the 2005 European Accord has not been updated since the 2001/2002 model year. In that case I would still say it is an old design - you really need to look at when it FIRST came out - RIGHT?

    Again the 2001-2002 European Accord was not a bad car for its day - its just about even with a 2006 Civic in ride quality - the Civic handles better.

    If money were no object - I would need to build a 100 car garage - for EACH of my dozen or so homes. $$ is almost always a major factor in the car buying equation - nothing wrong with that BTW. But taking this IMPORTANT factor off the table - helps put focus on other things - like RIDE quality - HANDLING - PERFORMANCE BLA BLA BLA.

    Lets be honest about our motives - if the TSX and IS cost the same which would you pick - if you say the TSX then why? What other than CHEAPER PRICE makes it better. If the only reason you can give is its CHEAPER - then thats fine - thats a good reason. But if you take the position CHEAPER is better then you could find many cars that cost less then the TSX (Civic & Accord) and deliver just about the same driving experience. But then some accountant (I was a CPA for may years - so I can slam accountants if I want to) will add up some combo of options to show that you can buy a TSX for "about" the same as the Accord - but you still get some minor gizmos that the Accord does not even offer - we all know that every driving enthusiast must have BLUETOOTH!
  • speedracer3speedracer3 Member Posts: 650
    Here's what Consumer Report says about the handling on the TSX and the IS 250

    TSX: "Handling is more agile than that of the Accord, with quicker turn-in response and better tire grip, but the ride is a bit stiff"

    IS 250: "The ride, is jittery and handling secure, but not sporty"
  • z71billz71bill Member Posts: 1,986
    I like to read AUTO magazines - but I would not base my decision on which car to buy on what they write. I like to go see for myself - Based on my FIRST HAND experience the ride and handling of the IS (both 250&350) is very nice. The ride of the TSX is about the same as a Civic and handling is poor.

    How could a car with a "jittery ride" provide "secure handling"?

    BTW - did that issue of CR also include the review of the 2006 toasters? - I have been having some problems with mine and may need to buy a new one!
  • speedracer3speedracer3 Member Posts: 650
    I didn't buy my TSX based on car based on reviews. I drove the following cars: BMW 325i, Mazda6, VW Passat, Honda Accord, Infiniti G35. I could tell you that the closest thing to the TSX in terms of "fun to drive" for the price was the Passat. Having had enough little problems with my Audi, I didn't want another headache. A lot of these cars were more than I was willing to spend, so they were discounted right of the bat. The IS 250 fell in the "too expensive" category so I didn't even bother. I have no regrets, I enjoy the TSX tremendously. Drive what you like my friend, and enjoy...I do.
  • notjafonotjafo Member Posts: 63
    I'm with speedracer3

    I did drive the IS250, and I preferred the feel of the TSX. I didn't like the amount of visibility I had in the IS, I didn't like the more cramped interior, and, I didn't find it any more fun to drive. And another point keeps getting missed - I didn't want a RWD car, and I looked at the AWD IS, and it's not available with a MT.

    As for money, if you forced me to spend as much as it would take to get a comparably equipped IS, well then, I'd probably get the TL (with the 6spd MT). And that's a point that's missed here - I chose the TSX over the IS and over the TL. It does everything I want, and you think there is something wrong because it also happens to cost less?

    And don't keep getting fooled by a car's platform - you'd be surprised how old some car platforms are out there, and how they show up in multiple models by a manufacturer. Volvo uses the same platform for quite a few of its cars, sporty and not.
  • waw40waw40 Member Posts: 39
    You would be surprised how many people avoided buying crappy products or services thanks to the information in CR. It is not CR vs. first hand experience, as you seem to impute - both are parts of an informed decision.
    When I am ready for a new car I: 1. read about cars within my interest range (sporty sedans, coupes, manual only)- CR, Edmunds, nctd, Car&Driver, MotorTrend... and within my price range (up to $40K)to narrow my choices to 3-5 cars; 2. I read/listen to the opinions of owners of such cars, and 3. I test drive my 2-3 finalists and make my final decision based on driving impression, desired equipment and feel of the interior, exterior appearance, and availability of preferred body/interior color combo - in this order.

    After this procedure, I had no hesitation to choose TSX and I never looked back.

    Happy toaster hunting z71bill! Make sure that you make your toasts of whole wheat or rye bread - CR recommends...
  • z71billz71bill Member Posts: 1,986
    Good points - all valid - if it is the best for you and still costs less how can you go wrong?
  • lexus_jnlexus_jn Member Posts: 102
    I just tried out the TSX this afternoon at the Acura dealer in Naperville, IL. I agree about the handling of TSX...Yet the TSX's acceleration is not as fast and smooth as IS. To be frank, I don't think it's fair to compare TSX and IS. Sure, TSX is cheaper but it doesn't mean that we consider this model should go head to head with IS.

    I met a few friends at lunch last Friday and surprisingly most of us all shared the same opinion- Acura's front design is the ugliest among all others luxury brands. If you look at all Acura models from the front view, they do not look like luxury cars. Putting aside luxury, and performance (Lexus & BMW seem to edge out Acura on those 2 factors), Acura might as well provide a better value for the money because its price is more affordable than BMW & Lexus. In term of styling, design...I think Acura seems to fall behind than that of Infiniti, Lexus...etc. I was at the Chicago Auto Show last month and boy..I must say that the new Acura RDX is a true disappointment and no WOW products in the Acura's lineup as well. No wondee Acura showroom attracted just very few spectators at the Chicago Auto Show.
  • notjafonotjafo Member Posts: 63
    and this is why taste can't be argued -

    I like the look of the IS and the new BMW, but I also really like the look of the TSX and the new TL over the previous TL. One of the things I don't like about the Accord, relative to the Acuras, is the frumpy, big headlights on the Accord. And While I like the look of the IS, I don't like the look of the Lexis ES - it's an ugly frumpy front end. As for the Infiniti, well, I think they are all pretty ugly. Period.
  • lexus_jnlexus_jn Member Posts: 102
    Different taste and opinion make life more interesting, isn't it? :-)

    Hopefully the next generation of TL won't disappoint Acura loyalists. I already owned a Bimmer and a Lexus and I look forward to driving an Acura in the future (if Acura comes up with a better design for the TL). I think that owning a different brand once in a while will give you a pretty clear perspective about the strength and weakness of each brand. Oh, while I really like the space TL offers, I have heard others complained that the TL is kinda big for a sport car...What is your opinion?
  • mvc_jonesmvc_jones Member Posts: 88
    I do not consider the/my TL a sportscar. It is 'sporty', but overall a luxury sedan. I am very happy with the package and agree with those that state it does many things well but is generally not the best of class in any area. The balance of this car is nice, between luxury, space, sportiness, good design/aesthetics, quality, etc...
  • johnny420johnny420 Member Posts: 473
    sure sportscars have two doors, not four. As far as the TL needing a "better" design, that's purely a matter of opinion. The car has been selling very well since its refresh. Somebody must like it.
  • notjafonotjafo Member Posts: 63
    I drove the TL and thought it handled quite well, but it was a bigger car than I needed and I thought the TSX was more fun - hence I have the TSX.

    There are lots of bigger cars than the TL that are sports sedans - maybe not sports cars, but sports sedans.
  • speedracer3speedracer3 Member Posts: 650
    but IMO, nothing handles like a German car. Japanese cars just have different degrees of sportiness. German cars, are true sport sedans.
  • notjafonotjafo Member Posts: 63
    there is also a fundamental difference between rear wheel driven cars and front - and the move to AWD in the sports sedan market will be interesting to follow

    mercedes-benz was losing sales to subaru in new england because of the focus on RWD, and the auto press credits this with MB's introduction of AWD
  • speedracer3speedracer3 Member Posts: 650
    It's not a FWD/RWD debate. I just think German cars handle better.VW/Audi have plenty of front wheel drive cars that have excellent handling, not to mention the Quattro models. The Infiniti G35 is a RWD car, IMO it doesn't handles as well as it's German competitors. Again, the TSX is a great package because it offers, sport, luxury, reliability and it does it all without breaking the bank.
  • johnny420johnny420 Member Posts: 473
    I have no doubt that German sedans handle better than other sedans, specifically BMW's. At 8/10ths or more. I've only driven one (an E90), and it was good. I haven't yet had the opportunity to live with one.

    That said, the TSX with A-Spec suspension and better-than-OEM rubber handles pretty darn well, with excellent steering feel and response. I'm not sure that I need a sedan to handle much better than my car does for street driving, including spirited street driving, say 7/10ths and below.

    Would I like to experience BMW ownership at some point? Sure. Then I can truly decide for myself. But, for now, in my third year of owning it, the TSX is proving to be one heck of a blast to drive. And stacked up against todays somewhat bloated Bimmers, I'm sure the TSX acquits itself quite nicely, regardless of price point.

    For all the criticisms about the TSX's supposed lack of power, poor handling (as stated earlier in this thread :confuse:) etc, etc, I still get a big kick out of it every time I turn the key. For me, that's all that matters.

  • jeepdriver2jeepdriver2 Member Posts: 5
    My wife and I were in the market for a sedan after deciding to sell our Jeep. We tested and looked at the IS250, TSX, S40 T5, A3/A4, Jetta, Accord V6, SAAB 9-3 and the 3 Series. We wanted something fun but practical at the same time, with good driving characteristics (to me, this does not mean the fastest 0-60 time- coming from a jeep I thought all of these cars were amazing to drive). Also, I wanted to keep the price around 30K and no more than 35K. The S40 was the car at the top of our list before we started looking but quickly fell off because the interior felt somewhat cramped and being picky, I didn't like the side mirrors, which seemed much smaller than the other cars. We ruled the 3 Series out because we thought it had a plain, almost ugly interior on the base model and no one at the dealer offered to help us even though we were the only people in the showroom. I absolutely loved driving the Jetta and both Audis but my sister has owned 2 vw's and both had numerous electrical and mechanical problems. That said, I still really considered the A3 because for the extra space a hatchback offers and it had a really nice interior. My wife was set on a sedan though. Audi had another strike because the first salesman was extremely rude and told us we couldn't park our 99 civic in his "showcar" place- he then told us to move it the handicap spot- so we promptly left. So the A4 was out.

    Since I hadn't seen the Lexus before going to the dealer, the new design was very striking and also very tempting. The Lexus had a very nice interior and really stood out to me as being put together with a lot of care. My wife thought so too. But the rear seat didn't fold down and that was a must have for us (same issue with the in stock BMW's). I also may be one of the few that appreciates fwd in the wintertime, ,which I did not have on my liberty so the lexus had another strike. Finally, we were mostly ignored at the dealership just like at BMW. I just had the impression that they thought we were two kids window shopping for the car we might want when we get grow up and get real jobs (I'm in my early 30's and probably doing better than the salespeople who wouldn't talk to me).

    Unlike the IS250 which I hadn't seen on the road but was very interested in, I didn't even know the TSX existed. I put it on the list almost as an afterthought and I'm glad I did. All of the cars I drove were exceptional, no doubt about it, and I would have been happy with any of them. However, having owned 3 hondas in the past, the layout and controls of the TSX felt very familiar to me, except much nicer. I suppose the familiarity of those past cars, coupled with all of the new features on the 2006 TSX (as opposed to 2005) convinced me that this was the right choice. Moreover, the decision was made even easier because the dealer threw in free maintenance and car washes for 7 years. Best car buying experience I ever had, looked at these forums before I negotiated and they gave me the price I asked for without even trying to wheel and deal. We ended up buying a 2006 TSX and I do not regret it, though again, I'm sure I would have been very happy with the IS250 or any of the others.

    One last thing, the only car, in my opinion, that stood out among the cars I drove was the Accord V-6. In terms of power, it was simply in another class and the interior and features were just as nice as any of the other cars, better in most cases. It truly may have been the most sensible choice in terms of value for dollar. That said, I couldn't bring myself to buy a car that, at least it seems, every other person in the US owns. If I could have gotten over that, I would be driving it today.
  • verticalvertical Member Posts: 12
    After reading many posts and test driving new Civic, Accord V6 EX. Volvo S40 T5, and BMW 325i, I just purchased a 2006 TSX (upgraded from a Civic)

    I don't think a Civic can compete with a TSX in terms of build quality, handling, refinement, etc. Even the new Civic is full of plastics in the interior, and that feeling continues on the road (gimmicky).

    Accord's ride is soft and powerful but not precise, but I wanted a sports sedan, not a family sedan (I prefer my Passat V6 for that purpose)

    Volvo's ride is very good (turbo makes it a formidable car), but I couldn't get past the fact that it shares a lot in common with the Mazda 3. Plus, I don't like the way the options are bundled.

    325i's handling is a notch above a TSX, but again, the way options are bundled...

    Overall, I prefer the all inclusive nature of Acura's offering, plus, for less than $30K, I don't think there is a car out there that has everything a TSX does (C/D 10 Best List agrees)
  • biker4biker4 Member Posts: 746
    mercedes-benz was losing sales to subaru in new england because of the focus on RWD, and the auto press credits this with MB's introduction of AWD

    Wow, MB worried about losing sales to Subaru :confuse: :P :shades:
  • haminhamin Member Posts: 12

    good choice ...I am glad you bought it ....I am in same situation, looked up TSX/ BMW3 / AUDI A4/ IS 250...have decided for TSX. can you tell me what price you bought this for ( excluding tax.) .....did you buy one with navigation??

    looking for your reply.
  • patpat Member Posts: 10,421
    Hi and welcome!

    You'll want to head on over to our Acura TSX: Prices Paid & Buying Experience discussion. That's a far better resource for you than this discussion where the subject is a comparison with the IS 250, not the actual buying details.

    Good luck!
  • ninjaguyninjaguy Member Posts: 21
    The TSX, introduced in the US in April 2003 as a 2004 model, is the same car as the European/Japanese Accord that went on sale in fall 2003 as a 2003 model.

    I am surprised about the comments about the poor handling, maybe the tires on the car you drove were under inflated. If you haven't already bought another car, suggest driving another TSX again.

    My son has a 2004 TSX with AT, and I am impressed by the handling. I drove both the IS250/350 with ATs at the Taste of Lexus last fall, and I thought that the handling was similar. Although the HP is about the same (IS250 and TSX), the IS250's extra 20 ft-lbs of torque do make a difference with the AT.

    Regarding your comment about cheaper price, everything is a factor in choosing a car (power, handling, comfort, luxury, etc.) including price. I was highly anticipating the IS when it was announced last spring, but was extremely disappointed when the price was announced last fall. Lexus made a serious mistake in selling the IS at BMW prices.
  • ninjaguyninjaguy Member Posts: 21
    In my #144 above, I made a typo: The European/Japanese Accord went on sale in fall 2002 (not fall 2003) as a 2003 model.
  • z71billz71bill Member Posts: 1,986
    So my original post - that the 2006 TSX is based on a 2001 or 2002 Accord was correct. I was not sure if the European Accord (which the TSX is based on) was updated in 2001 or 2002 - I will take your word for it (2002). I bet all the people who just bough a 2006 TSX will be VERY happy to hear that their new car is based on the 2002 and not the 2001 model Accord! I wonder why Honda (Acura)does not put that in the sales literature - COME BUY OUR 2006 TSX - it is a REAL DRIVERS CAR - based on the LATEST 2002 technology!

    Not slamming the TSX because it costs less than the IS - BWM - fill in the ______ with whatever.

    It just seems like every post kept coming back to - lower price - better VALUE - BANG for the BUCK - LOOK AT ALL THE FEATURES you get at NO ADDITIONAL COST - and things like BEST HANDLING - GREAT 4 cylinder!! ENGINE - GREAT BRAKES are not listed very often - then the main reason the car was purchased was IT COST LESS. Nothing wrong with saving money - but why not just admit - I bought it because it does 85% of everything the more expensive cars do and I save $5,000. The extra 15% is not worth $5K!

    The 2006 Civic has about the same ride quality as the TSX - but (the Civic) has MUCH better handling - the TSX does have a nicer interior - but at 2 times the price it should have a better interior - and it should RIDE better and it should HANDLE better. That is the point of my comparison to the Civic - not that the dash of the Civic has more plastic (compared to the TSX).
  • speedracer3speedracer3 Member Posts: 650
    I don't understand why you are insisting on imposing your values and preferences on other people. So what that the car is based on a 2002 model?. A Lamborghini Coutach is old technology but boy would I love to have one. Who cares?. The TSX has all the latest gadgets, tell me what technology am I missing out by having a TSX vs. an IS 250. What does the IS have that the TSX doesn't?. I don't think you are reading what people are saying. We all bought the TSX not JUST because of the price, but because of the whole package. And again, your Honda Civic comparison is just plain idiotic. The Civic is a fun to drive, economy car. That's it. You can't even get it with leather for goodness sake!. Get back to planet earth my friend.
  • waw40waw40 Member Posts: 39
    I concur with speedracer3 100%. It seems that z71bill represents an incurable case of ISism. I suggest we let him remain triumphant in his conviction that IS is better than any other car in the world and stop this useless ping-pong of arguments.
  • z71billz71bill Member Posts: 1,986
    What does the IS have that the TSX doesn't? Lets see -

    Much better ride quality
    WAY better handling
    Faster 0-60 time
    RWD (some may like FWD better - most SPORT SEDANS are RWD)
    A higher price (must take the bad along with the good)

    The Civic example is right on target - perfect example of how 2006 technology can be better than 2002!

    Not sure why the Civic handles better than the TSX - both cars are front wheel drive - the Civic has a little bit LONGER wheel base - and is lighter - both have 4 banger engines.

    I would guess the longer wheel base and lighter weight allow a relatively stiffer suspension to be used - the result is a ride quality that is about the same (as the TSX / 2002 European Accord) - but still provides better handling. Isn't 2006 technology GREAT!

    I still predict that the next time Acura updates the TSX (assuming they do) it will be based on the Civic platform.
  • jeepdriver2jeepdriver2 Member Posts: 5
    $26,200 + Tax and title for non-navi A/T. I somewhat regret not taking a closed look at the navi but I wasn't sure how useful it would be to me. Since I purchased the car, I read a lot about navigation and wish I had taken a closer look at it , though it may not have changed my mind in the end.
  • cmschmiecmschmie Member Posts: 27
    Again you are quoting performance numbers. Now I am not sure if you are going Auto vs. Auto or Manual vs Manual. But, if you are saying manual vs manual then your performance "comparison," look at post #118.
    And again, "Much better ride quality", "WAY better handling" are subjective. You say these are better in the IS because you like the IS more, that in the ONLY reason you can say that.
    It's like comparing Gold Delicious Apples to Red Rome Apples. I like Gold Delicious more so then it must be better. Give me a break.
    I like the TSX (just bought one the other day) and I am not knocking you for liking the IS. It is a great and a very nice looking car, but, in my opinion it is not a $6k-$7k better car than the TSX.
  • chikoochikoo Member Posts: 3,008
    >>>Finally, we were mostly ignored at the dealership just like at BMW. I just had the impression that they thought we were two kids window shopping for the car we might want when we get grow up and get real jobs (I'm in my early 30's and probably doing better than the salespeople who wouldn't talk to me).<<<<

    Seriously something wrong here. I usually walk into a Lexus dealership unshaven, wearing rubber sandals, jeans and t-shirt hanging out and the salespeople still come up to me, greet me and enquire about my interests and how they can help me out. I guess the "attitude" with which I walk in makes the difference?
This discussion has been closed.