Acura TSX vs Lexus IS 250

z71bill · March 2006

Now I understand why there is so much confusion -

If I say a Silverado 4x4 has good handling I mean compared to other full size 4x4 pick ups - when I say a TSX handles poorly it means compared to the cars it is trying to compete with. That does not mean I think a Silverado handles better than a TSX. That would be - well dumb.

Doesn't that seem like the right way to evaluate vehicles?

Maybe the problem I have with the TSX (besides the poor ride and handling) is it is kind of between two classes of cars.

It is above the Accord & Camry (4 banger models) in most measurements (& costs more) - it is below the IS 250 and BMW 325i (but costs less).

So it can be evaluated as a low cost alternative to the IS/BMW - a step above the Accord & Camry - I think that must be how the people who own one think of it.

I on the other had see it more like an expensive alternative to the Accord & Camry (again the 4 banger) and not up to the same level of performance / handling / ride as the IS/BMW.

When I see people posting things like - the TSX has fold down seats - or more leg room in the rear - costs less (all true) it makes me wonder why - if those things are so important - and things like razor sharp steering and a firm but sporty ride are not - why the person did not just save the $5K and buy an Accord - get even more room in the rear and still have fold down seats.

BTW - the Hummer does handle pretty good for its size - & it has more ground clearance than the TSX!

mvc_jones · March 2006

Consumers buy products because they generally like them for a variety of reasons, such as performance, style, utility, value, etc... Usually these reasons are considered together as opposed to considering only one item as important.

Your arguments are generally based on singular criteria, such as your sports sedan argument you repeatedly make, and now above, an argument purely on utility.

People probably buy the TSX (or any other car, for that matter) because the combination of features, style, price, performance, utility, etc... appeal to what they want.

You could offer the same argument above based on singular criteria (again, you offer utility in the argument above) for the Chrsler 300C vs. Mercedes E350 vs. Dodge Charger, last gen Audi A4 vs. last gen VW Passat, Chevy Corvette Convertible vs. Cadillac XLR, Chysler Crossfire vs. last gen Mercedes SLK, all similar platforms respectively, different cars, different combination of features, utility, design, performance, feel, while sharing platforms and many mechanical parts and switchgear. All appeal to different tastes for a variety of reasons. Each, if compared on a singular trait, may yield its advantage (or disadvantage.) Other items are purely subjective, such as the appearance or interior design.

I think you need to consider that people have different taste, perceptions, and combinations of items that appeal to them in different quantities, and what appeals to people is a more complex equation than a single factor discussion. If everything were so singular in nature, there would be less choice due to very simple determinations of what is 'better' on very simple factors. If this were true, platform sharing probably would not be as common as it is today, because why would a company bother with several variations on a theme if they just had to perfect one trait of a car and be done with it.

From some, it may be the choice of a TSX offers good utility with appealing style, others may enjoy the mix of performance, utility and design features. Same goes for any car.

At times, you seem incredulous that anyone could choose the TSX for any reason, as there is always a better choice in your view, be it performance, utility, or value. However, about 35,000 TSX's were sold in the US in 2005, a 15% increase over 2004, so there clearly is an appeal of the TSX.

My take on it is that it does many things well and offers a good balance of utility, performance, good design and value, and this combination is appealing for what many people are looking for in a $25,000-$30,000 car. Sounds like a good approach to me.

pat · April 2006

Again, Bill, you have made your feelings about the TSX and about this comparo very well known. There is no reason to keep repeating yourself.

We are specifically comparing the TSX to the IS 250 regardless of whether you find that valid. Please stop arguing the premise of the comparo. It's happening whether you agree with it or not.

There must be some other discussions which seem more appropriate to you - please have a look. And, as always, feel free to start any other comparo that you'd like to discuss.

johnny420 · April 2006

My point about your evaluation of the TSX's handling as poor is that it runs counter to almost everyone elses opinion of it.

So, let me get this straight. z71bill = correct, while the rest of the automotive world = incorrect. Does that sound about right? Why are you posting here? You should be writing for one of the car mags, if only so you can educate a greater segment of the car buying public.

I like to learn something new every week. This week, courtesy of z71bill, I learned that my car has lousy handling.

pat · April 2006

I've asked Bill to move on, let's the rest of us do the same.

vdada · April 2006

I test drove both these cars recently and finally decided on the TSX. I preferred the AWD over RWD because of the weather situation where I live.

The IS250 had a much better interior quality but rear space was a joke being a 4 seater- and no fold down rear seats was a another big negative. Visibility was poor compared to the TSX. I also felt that the steering was a bit more heavy. Maybe because it was an AWD.

The TSX felt more responsive and had a lighter steering. Visibility was much better and I felt more relaxed while driving it.

I could not justify paying 6-8K premium over the TSX for the IS250 AWD. The IS250 is a good car but overpriced.

TSX wins!

pg48477 · April 2006

Im not going to go in to details, as one that states that TSX handle poorly simply dont know or dont understand what handling is. Same states for ride quality.

I never understood why, for some Z people, one car should be an alternative to another. I think its a ridicules thing to say, I for example buy cars because I like it not because it is an alternative to another car. With this logic IS must be an alternative to 325 and 325 is an alternative to 330 and 330 is an alternative to Audi RS4, I think you get the point, or do you???

Both cars are very close in performance, TSX offers more utility and MT in TSX is ten times better than the one in IS. TSX is just a pleasure to drive, it feels light, very responsive and did I mention, by far the best MT in the segment? That alone is enough for me to choose TSX over IS, forget about the money.

lexus_jn · April 2006

"TSX offers more utility and MT in TSX is ten times better than the one in IS"

Well, you're entitled to your opinion..you can say TSX is hundred times or thousand times better and I or other IS owners could say the opposite. From the TSX test drive I could feel the engine a bit shaken (thru steering) when I accelerated up to 85-90mph ..This never happened with the IS. Ride is almost as firm as IS but I somehow felt TSX or even TL kinda sluggish as compared to IS or BMW. It seems as if you need to push your foot harder in order to get more power from the vehicle. Just a question- do you think JD Power and consumers lack knowledge when they rate TSX performance only 3 star and IS 5 star? Yet IS also beats TSX in almost every category in comparison from performance, mechanical to comfort, body & interior quality...etc. In my opinion, if you have a tight budget and don't want to spend more than $30K for a car then TSX is not a bad choice.

johnny420 · April 2006

Just a question- do you think JD Power and consumers lack knowledge when they rate TSX performance only 3 star and IS 5 star?

It depends on how you define performance. Since most people in this country define performance by how fast a car goes in a straight line, then sure, the IS350 wins. So what? When you factor in chassis balance, steering feel and handling, the picture is not so clear. Most head to head comparisons of the IS V. TSX that I've read give the TSX the nod in handling, even with its sub-par OEM tires. So, define your terms.

You cite JD Power as if it's the end-all-be-all of automotive knowledge. I take everything that comes from JD with a very large grain of salt.

Choose your poison.

speedracer3 · April 2006

Again, JD Power is one source. I know that before bought my TSX I read every article written on the car. Most articles rave about the car. The one major negative that some complained about was it's lack of power under 3000rpm, and since I am not drag racing I couldn't care less. I test drove the TSX a total of 3 times and loved every minute of it. So do I care what the JD Power respondents said?...if 4 out 5 people prefer vanilla to chocolate, it doesn't really matter to me because it will not change my preference for chocolate.

pg48477 · April 2006

I did not say that TSX was better, I sad that it has a much better MT, I dont think you can argue with that. I dont know what you felt during your test drive, maybe it was a feel of the road, which Lexus does not have at any speed. In Lexus you get the same road feel at the stop light and going 90MPH, some people like it, I dont. In TSX you do feel the road, incredibly well for FWD car.

It seems as if you need to push your foot harder in order to get more power from the vehicle.

You do have to push your foot harder to get more power in any car, more RPM  more HP and torque. I though you already new that. One the serious note, I do like that you have to push TSX to have fun with it. The engine takes high RPMs with the smile and with the best in its class MT, its a perfect combination. Once again TSX is just fun and easy to drive.

I will not reply on your JD Power comment, as it has no value in my decision-making. I only read revues to find out about whats new out there. There is nothing better than first hands experience.

lexus_jn · April 2006

"It depends on how you define performance. Since most people in this country define performance by how fast a car goes in a straight line, then sure, the IS350 wins. So what?"

I think your whole argument is dead wrong to claim most people in this country define performance by how fast a car goes in a straight line. Also, it won't be fair to put
TSX on par with IS 350. Just think how people would react if I am going to compare IS 350 performance with Corvette Z06 or M5's

lexus_jn · April 2006

"You do have to push your foot harder to get more power in any car, more RPM"

I just feel you have to do it much more with Acura..It's not necessary a bad thing but I will for sure get fatigue fast with my foot especially on a long drive or during daily rush hour. Even with 185 lbs-ft RPM I still feel IS 250 more responsive than Acura TL at 233 lbs-ft and TSX's on comparison. This indeed in my opinion is tied to the Acura's FWD thing. It's not rocket science but if we understand the law of physics then we probably know the advantage of RWD over FWD. I am sure it could be a reason why most Acura models are a bit sluggish as compared to other brands such as Lexus, Infiniti, BMW. I hope they will get rid of FWD or offer more RWD choices in their future releases. I do like Acura TSX and won't mind to own a TL in the future but right now I just feel Lexus IS is more superior to TSX or even TL in many categories. Again, don't ever think I use JDP for my purchasing decision. I could purchase a car with no influence on JDP data but that does not mean JDP info is not credible. In fact, along with CR, JDP is one of the most trusted sources that not only do Americans count on but also people who live abroad. So when JDP rates TSX 3 star and IS 5 star..the reality is not too far from those numbers.

z71bill · April 2006

I really doubt that Acura will ever make the TSX rear wheel drive - the Accord (maybe the Civic in the future) that the TSX is (will be) based on is FWD - and will stay that way - its cheaper to build and many of the people who buy FWD economy cars can't tell the difference anyway. BTW - I bought a FWD economy car for my daughter (Mazda3) - so I am not saying there is anything wrong with FWD econo boxes - people just need to be honest about what they are driving - just because a car has leather and a NAV system does not make it an entry-level luxury performance sedan!

pg48477 - As far as comparing different vehicles I see your point - buy what you like - but I also understand that most people have some idea of the class / size / style of vehicle they want to consider (compare as alternatives) before they start to do test drives. Now be honest - how many full size vans or SUV's did you test drive before you bought your TSX? Did you - just maybe - have a short list of cars that are alternatives to each other? I bet you did! Or did you just randomly do test drives until you drove the TSX and then said - this is the ONE!

I guess if you put enough sugar on it even oatmeal tastes OK. But I still like spicy chicken wings.

speedracer3 · April 2006

...and just because it has FWD drive it does not preclude it from being a sport sedan. Aside from the TSX, the Audi A4 has terrific handling for a FWD car.

Z71bill, if handling is so important to you, and you want the best handling sport sedan in the market you are driving the wrong car. The benchmark for sport sedans is the BMW 3 series, not the Lexus IS. For about the same price as the IS you could have the best, you are settling for second fiddle.

When it comes to sport sedans IMHO, under $30K the TSX has no equal, over $30K you are in BMW territory, where the 3 series reigns supreme. The Lexus IS is just another wanna be 3 series.

johnny420 · April 2006

You can think whatever you like. Most people equate automotive performance with HP, which translates into straightline speed. That's just fact. If you don't think so, continue to peruse these boards, where 0-60 times are argued ad infinitum as if they're the ultimate definition of automotive performance. You've been here two months - keep reading. It's usually only car enthusiasts that take other performance factors into account.

Nobody is putting the TSX on par with anything. I only challenge your ridiculous citing of JD Power as some indicator of any cars worth. If JD Power dislikes a car, chances are I'll like it. That's how much I, and others, disregard their input. That company is in the back pocket of auto manufacturers.

pg48477 · April 2006

Im sorry Lexus_IN but I dont see your point. What laws of physics have to do with your ability to press on accelerator?? Are you saying that Acura need to adjust the pedal and make it softer or are you saying IS response better to your input than TSX, TL; in any case what lbs-ft have anything to do with it? I do know that under acceleration weight shifts to the rear, but it will only effect performance of FWD car if it can overpower front wheels, not the case in TSX. I still dont see how responsiveness under acceleration will be effected. It might affect the handling, not in TSX, but I dont think that is what you had in mind.

z71bill · April 2006

Sure - a car can have FWD and still be considered sporty - I am sure lots of people think a Buick you can also eat oat meal at a baseball game - but most people think a hot dog is the way to go. I am sure some folks think a Buick Lucerne is a hot rod sports car!

I just wonder why BMW, Lexus and MB don't agree with the front wheel drive = best sports car platform theory - and I also wonder why you do?

pg48477 · April 2006

I dont think Acura will make RWD TSX, and why would they? We already have G35, IS and C350 unsuccessfully trying to catch BMW. I think next generation TSX will be SH-AWD or at least have it as an option and will share engine with RDX.

I dont know were you got the idea that I would compare SUV to sedan, I did have a list of cars, more or less in the same class, that I wanted. Honestly, I test drove G35, TL, TSX, IS, A4, 325 and 330 before I leased 325i. I never said that I bought TSX.
3 series is in another world compared to above mentioned vehicles in terms of handling and thats what I wanted. That does not change the fact that TSX is a very nice car and handles as good as IS, again its different but just as good. If I could change MT in my 3 to the one in TSX I would do it in a heartbeat. I did drive both TSX and TL extensively as I owned TL-S and had a good relationship with sales person at the dealership. I just dont see how can anyone deny that TSX is fun to drive and offer good handling and nice road feel.
P.S. I hate oatmeal.

pg48477 · April 2006

IS, TSX and even 325 are not sports cars. They all sporty.

lexus_jn · April 2006

citing JPD data to prove that you were wrong and you called it ridiculous?

lexus_jn · April 2006

"The Lexus IS is just another wanna be 3 series."

While there are different opinions about 3-series vs Lexus in term of performance, I do believe BMW 3-series is just another Lexus wanna be when it comes to quality or luxury. However, there is already another thread for this type of this discussion.

lexus_jn · April 2006

"We already have G35, IS and C350 unsuccessfully trying to catch BMW"

The best car does not necessary have the best handling. IMO..G35, IS are better overall cars than BMW 3-series. I personally prefer 2006 TSX over 2006 3-series since I think it offers more value for the money. Anyway, I have to stop since this is not a thread for BMW discussion.

pg48477 · April 2006

You are entitled to your own opinion.

I understand that you attached to luxury more then performance and so you prefer Lexus, but G35???

BMW offers the best handling, TSX has the best value and its more fun to drive then IS (IMO).

johnny420 · April 2006

citing JPD data to prove that you were wrong and you called it ridiculous?

No, the fact that you would use JP Power data at all in a discussion about cars is what I call ridiculous.

Like I said, if you think you're right then you have a lot more homework to do.

Good luck and happy yachting. :shades:

151ranch · April 2006

JPD data is wrong - it's based on the old IS - see post #164. Anyway, this entire thread proves the point of why Consumer Reports and JPD are suspect in their ratings. They are based on someone's opinion, not objective data.

Of all the cars we drove, I liked the 330i the best. My husband liked the G35. We both hated the TL. We both refused to consider the IS250 because the manual was awful.
My husband's all time favorite car - Rabbit GTI. Mine - CRXsi. Our tastes in vehicles are very similar but we still have different priorities when we buy a car. And that is reflected when we submit our Consumer Reports reviews.

lexus_jn · April 2006

homework ???...don't know but I'm troubled by your famous statement "It depends on how you define performance. Since most people in this country define performance by how fast a car goes in a straight line, then sure, the IS350 wins. So what?"

Don't you think it's ridiculous to claim most Americans define performance of a car based on how fast it goes in a straight line. I think you kinda underestimated the majority of drivers out there. You're comparing TSX and IS250 not TSX vs IS350 so I find it odd that you borrowed IS350 data to jusitfy your opinion.

I cited JPD just to point out that your opinion does not reflect what others think (the majority). In other words, you can express your viewpoint but if you use your own thoughts and tie them to the so-called "facts" then you need correction.

devore420 · April 2006

I don't think it's ridiculous to claim that most Americans define performance as straight-line speed. In my experience talking to other people about cars, this has definitely been the case. It seems like to most folks "performance" means "how fast it takes off" or "how fast it goes."

Heck, my dad bought an S2000 recently after thinking about doing it for years. He drove it over to visit and talked about how quick it was off the line and how fast he'd gone in it. I laughed and said that was hardly the S2000's strong suit: then we took it out on some twisty roads to demonstrate the car's actual notable performance characteristics.

Why else do so many popular American cars have so bloody much horsepower? Why are so many V6es? A Pontiac Grand Prix GT equipped similarly will cost around the same as a TSX but that Pontiac has 260HP and 280lb/ft of torque!

Advertisements in the US focus on power - not on handling or braking. If they DO talk about handling or braking, it's in the context of safety, not performance.

Considering all of that I definitely think Americans - in general - tend to equate "performance" more with speed and acceleration than handling or braking.

johnny420 · April 2006

Do your homework. Then read what devore420 wrote. It's the Top Fuel mentality. In America, if it goes fast in a straight line, from point A to point B, it's a high-performance vehicle. What it does at the first turn is irrelevant. Horsepower is king. As exhibit A, I give you the Muscle Car Era (God rest its soul).

The only people that don't feel this way are automotive/driving enthusiasts, and those are few and far between.

Keep reading, for, on this topic, you are without clue. :shades:

lexus_jn · April 2006

Yes I did read and you know what... thousands of TSX/IS owners out there gave TSX 3 star and IS 5 star rating respectively. Unlike your famous written statement that's what I call FACT.

devore420 · April 2006

User opinons are just that - opinons, not facts. Sure, it's a fact that the JD Power consumer site give the IS 5 stars and the TSX 3 stars - but those ratings only reflect the opinon of the people who offered to provide it to JD Power.

How about other opinons? Edmunds.com ratings give the IS 250 a 9.5 rating based on about 33 reviews. The TSX gets 9.4 based on about 60 reviews. Car and Driver gives the TSX mostly 9/10s in its review, and it appears in their 10 Best Cars of 2006, although the IS does not.

I think if you look hard enough you can probably find whatever opinon suits your purpose. The important thing in my mind is not to base statements on only one opinon source. Also, "star" ratings - in my opinon - are just a starting point, not an answer. They're an aggregate of opinon about different things and to get a real feelig of whether you'll like car A or car B, in-depth reviews, rather than ratings, are probably better.

speedracer3 · April 2006

It seems like other than his JD Power's "star" argument Lexus_jn has run out of material. So he figures if he keeps repeating it, maybe some of us will change our minds. So I say, the 2006 Acura TSX was voted Best Sport Sedan by Car & Driver and has won this award 3 years in a row!

http://www.caranddriver.com/bestcars/10355/10best-cars-best-sports-sedan.html

So, until the Lexus IS 250 wins one Best Sport Sedan award, the Acura is clearly the better vehicle...and I'll keep repeating it just like Lexus_jN does.

mvc_jones · April 2006

Are you suggesting that every other car that got an award is legitimate, with no bias from advertising, but the TSX alone, due to Acura advertising dollars, got its own segment created by C&D and received an award? (Although you state that the Accord got their award legitimately.)

This assertion is baesless and absurb. With statements like this, any useful information you might add to this discussion (which appears to have come with rarity lately) retains no credibility.

I, for one, would prefer to read useful opinions and experiences with the TSX and IS250 vs. off-topic and unfounded statements that have a (confounding) tone of sour grapes...

lexus_jn · April 2006

The term "best" is very subjective. IS is also voted the Best New Entry Luxury by Autobytel so I don't think we can use that as a data point to judge which car is supreme. Please remember that the star rating by a car critic and organizations like JDP, CR is not analogous. JDP and CR never rated cars based on emotions ..aka "love at first sight"...rather they often conduct thorough reviews and extensive market research before coming up with the final rating. Like I once said , I do like TSX but I just find it's not fair to compare it to IS. As a reference point to my argument...rarely a review found on any magazines, newspapes, internet sites has an IS/TSX comparison..Don't you agree?

http://kcbs.autobytel.com/content/shared/articles/templates/index.cfm/article_pa- - ge_order_int/10/article_id_int/907

pat · April 2006

>> I, for one, would prefer to read useful opinions and experiences with the TSX and IS250 vs. off-topic and unfounded statements that have a (confounding) tone of sour grapes...

Agreed - let's go forward with doing just that.

speedracer3 · April 2006

I guess it's all about what holds the most weight. JD Power's ratings are based on "average Joe" car buyer's opinions when they first buy a car. Car & Driver's ratings are based on automotive journalists that drive cars and review them for a living. I don't always agree with what car reviews say, but I think they know more about cars than your average car buyer. CR tests toaster ovens, DVD players etc., they are not the pinnacle of automotive wisdom.
There are a lot of cars that have not been compared in auto magazines but are often cross-shopped when making a purchasing decision. The fact that a lot of people that bought TSX's or IS's considered the other car is enough to warrant a discussion....so IMO there is nothing unfair about the comparing these two cars.

novice · April 2006

Jonathan Welsh, who is a car expert for the Wall Street Journal, on April 5 wrote in response to a direct question about comparing the TSX to the IS250: "While the Acura TSX and Lexus IS 250 are similar on paper, they are quite different on the road. Their engines are roughly the same power, but they deliver their power differently. The Acura's high-revving four-cylinder engine gives it an edgier and, I think, much sportier feel compared with the Lexus. However, the Lexus V6 seems smoother, quieter and less mechanically busy. I have test-driven both cars and prefer the Acura by far because it feels more like a sports car. Its engine roars at high speeds, its shift lever (on the manual-transmission model) clicks precisely from one gear to the next where the Lexus version feels soft and a bit rubbery."

9er99 · April 2006

It seems the topic has veered off of a simple point.

If price played no point, and the IS250 and TSX were equally equipped, than of course the IS250 would win hands down. There is no debate to that point. But in the real world price does play a major point, and for a lot of people the IS250 is not worth $6200 or so more than the TSX.

Now for that $6200 you do receive a few features the TSX doesn't offer. Namely HIDs that swivel, ventilated seats, electrochromic outside mirrors with auto reverse tilt down, pwr steering wheel with memory, real wood trim, power rear susnshade, rain sensing wipers, and rear view camera. This is based off of the closest comparable equipment. TSX auto w/navi vs IS250 auto w/luxury package and navi. TSX msrp $315xx IS250 msrp 378xx. In fact the IS250 is more than the TL feature for feature.

So people have to decide whether the increased price for the IS250 is justified by the name and equipment.

Concerning sporting pretense however, I think it is a moot point. Clearly a RWD car has the better layout for handling, but in the ISs case the VDIM does not allow you to take advantage of this chassis. This has been reported multiple times by nearly all the magazines that have reviewed the IS. In fact some websites and magazines have shown how to disable the VDIM, and the additional handling benefits with it disabled. With the TSX you can turn off stability control. So between the two I would say that the handling is a wash. Now for bragging rights clearly RWD beats FWD. In the real world and in this comparison however, eh.

So in the end they are both great cars, but neither is perfect. But the attacks that the TSX is a gussied up Accord, or that the IS250 is a BMW pretender are ridiculous.

Both cars have great sales and strong lease residuals, this suggests that both cars are thought of highly. In the end it's each persons preference.

waw40 · April 2006

Now for that $6200 you do receive a few features the TSX doesn't offer.
Yes, but TSX offers some features the IS250 doesn't offer:
power leather seats std., tilt steering wheel, 60/40 folding back seats, larger cargo capacity...

This piece from ToV may be worth quoting here a propos TSX handling and someone's nonsense comments that since TSX is based on the European Accord it must be "old technology".

"The magazine "AutoCar" had a "Britain's best handling car" super shootout.

They had a bunch of categories, and for the saloon category they compared the Euro Accord Type S to the new Audi S4 and Volvo S60r. Keep in mind that the euro accord only has 187hp and is tuned with a softer suspension than the TSX, and only gets 205/55R16 wheels vs the TSX's 215/50/17s. Amazingly, the Accord won the comparison. It even had a better laptime around rockingham than the 300hp, AWD S60R, and was only 1 second slower than the Jag XJ-R, RX-8(!) and 1.5 seconds slower than the Mini Cooper S Works.

you can see the scans of the article here (you'll have to scroll down to find the Accord part):
http://www.elisetalk.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=3101&perpage=20&highligh- t=evo&pagenumber=1

The Accord's peak cornering speed of 66mph is pretty darned good for a tallish sedan, and it beats the rx-8's peak corner speed by 2mph. It also matches the Mitsubishi EVO VIII FQ300's peak cornering speed.

from_fl · April 2006

People just give a rest. No matter how you cut it.
TSX still looks like Civic. Infact, all Acura/Honda cars looks like Civis(except NSX). Honda has styling issue(boring). TSX is just not in same class as G35, IS 350 or BMW 3. The TL also looks like Civic.

johnny420 · April 2006

from_fl, just give it a rest. No matter how you cut it, the IS looks like a Sonata.

Now go crawl back under that rock, troll.

from_fl · April 2006

johyy420, ...you wrote.."BTW, I think the IS is a terrific looking car. I just have a feeling that the driving experience would be a little isolating for my tastes. ..."

Which car looks the better? TSX or IS?

from_fl · April 2006

message #163 3-23-06

lilredcorvt · April 2006

Terrific looking car?...what are you smoking? The IS250 has the ugliest looking rear and fat on the side. Enough of this, the IS looks like a KIA :mad:

glenn386 · April 2006

wow,

the testosterone is running in the high cotton around here. Differing opinions on the relative looks of the tsx and the IS250 are just that - opinions. For every person that thinks the tsx has better looks I can find someone who thinks that the IS is better looking. throwing around insults and making unsubstantiated claims like "the tsx is a glorified Civic just shows ignorance. The tsx has a different engine, wishbone suspension, better quality interior parts...etc....etc...etc...

I will be happy with either car.

Like my grand pa told me,"If everyone liked the same things..... everyone would be after your grand ma".

johnny420 · April 2006

johyy420, ...you wrote.."BTW, I think the IS is a terrific looking car. I just have a feeling that the driving experience would be a little isolating for my tastes. ..."

Which car looks the better? TSX or IS?

What does my previous post have to do with your idiotic comment that the TSX looks like a Civic?

pat · April 2006

We need to right now back off the personal comments.

We are here to talk about the cars and not each other - let's keep that in mind.

Thanks.

glenn386 · April 2006

I was a day or so away from buying the IS 250 awd, and the posts here got me to test drive the TSX again. I drove the Automatic last time and the car was nice. I drove the manual tranny this time and the car is much better.

I can buy the Tsx non nav for $26,500 (plus ttl& doc). I can buy the Is250 with luxury package (similar to the TSX equipment) for $33,600 plus ttl& doc).

I think the IS is a better car, but I don't know if it is $7100 better. This a third "fun car" for me, and the manual tranny won't be used commuting so i think it will just be a great drive.

I am now confused where three days ago I was sure that I would buy the IS 250.

I guess the question is:

1) the IS 250 awd
or
2) The TSX and an incredible wide screen home theater system.

pg48477 · April 2006

If you going with the manual and looking for a fun car, TSX is the way to go. 6 speed is just way better on TSX, youll have much more fun driving it then IS. If you looking for an ultimate fun vehicle, go with the BMW. 325 is much more fun to drive then both of them and its the same money as IS, even cheaper if you lease. Some people, including myself, does not like interior that much; but if fun is a major factor 3 is the way to go, TSX is second on my list. I have 325 and love it but if I could only replace MT with the one from TSX it would make it a perfect car.

lexus_jn · April 2006

I prefer IS over TSX. However, if I had to choose between TSX and 325i, I would take TSX in a heart beat. It's not my intention to offend you but I think TSX offers a bit of "luxury" feel as compared to the plain boring BMW interior (not to mention TSX is almost 10k cheaper given the same list of options as well as reliability in a long term). I also find IS a hell of fun to enjoy...the engine is responsive, the car has road feel and firm suspension..At the speed of 90-100mph, you hardly notice any shaking with the engine and feel like you're cruising since the wind noise is restrained to the mimimal... that's what I call fun. One time I did change lanes back and forth on the highway and find almost no body roll at all by switching lane#1 to 6 and vice versa...what a thrill, isn't it?. And the fun here is not just driving - openning doors or turning on enginee w/o a fob is also fun...playing with the ML sound system & navigation is hella fun ...for an ultimate fun on the road??? well, I think there's more life than just fun. Again, we already have an IS vs 3-series thread that seems more approriate.

Acura TSX vs Lexus IS 250

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles