Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Most popular vehicles
Popular New Cars
- New Acura MDX
- New Acura RDX
- New Audi Q5
- New BMW 3 Series
- New BMW X3
- New Buick Enclave
- New Cadillac Escalade
- New Chevrolet Equinox
- New Chrysler 300
- New Dodge Challenger
- New Ford Edge
- New Ford Escape
- New Ford Expedition
- New Ford Explorer
- New Ford F-150
- New Ford Focus
- New Ford Mustang
- New Honda Accord
- New Honda Civic
- New Honda CR-V
- New Honda Fit
- New Honda Odyssey
- New Honda Pilot
- New Hyundai Elantra
- New Hyundai Santa Fe
- New Hyundai Sonata
- New Hyundai Tucson
- New Jeep Compass
- New Jeep Grand Cherokee
- New Jeep Wrangler
- New Mazda 3
- New Mazda 6
- New Mazda CX-5
- New Nissan Altima
- New Nissan Maxima
- New Nissan Rogue
- New Porsche Cayenne
- New Ram 1500
- New Subaru Crosstrek
- New Subaru Forester
- New Subaru Impreza
- New Subaru Outback
- New Tesla Model S
- New Tesla Model X
- New Toyota 4Runner
- New Toyota Camry
- New Toyota Corolla
- New Toyota Highlander
- New Toyota Prius
- New Toyota RAV4
- New Toyota Sienna
- New Toyota Tacoma
- New Volkswagen Jetta
- New Volvo XC60
- New Volvo XC90
Popular Used Sedans
- Used BMW 5 Series
- Used Chevrolet Impala
- Used Chevrolet Malibu
- Used Chrysler 200
- Used Dodge Charger
- Used Ford Fusion
- Used Ford Taurus
- Used Honda Accord
- Used Honda Civic
- Used Hyundai Elantra
- Used Hyundai Sonata
- Used Tesla Model S
- Used Toyota Camry
- Used Toyota Corolla
- Used Volkswagen Jetta
Popular Used SUVs
- Used Acura MDX
- Used Acura RDX
- Used Ford Edge
- Used Ford Explorer
- Used Honda CR-V
- Used Honda Pilot
- Used Hyundai Santa Fe
- Used Jeep Compass
- Used Lincoln Navigator
- Used Mazda CX-5
- Used Nissan Rogue
- Used Subaru Crosstrek
- Used Subaru Forester
- Used Tesla Model X
- Used Volvo XC90
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
The TSX is a perfect mix of both IMO. And it also throws in the Value equation that acura is losing.
With the AWD, I think sh-awd is great, but it should be pulled for awhile until acura makes it lighter. VTM-4 is great and should be in the TSX as it IMO doesn't have the Muscle to lug Sh-awd... YET!
I I was in charge of acura, I'd continue to try finding that medium. I'd give the TSX the RDX's engine. People see that turbo as a bad idea but i see it as an opportunity in the making. It gets the AWD 4k lbs RDX to 60mph in about 7 seconds. Imagine what that would do to the tsx which is 700lbs lighter. I think at most the TSX would gain 150lbs. Being a somewhat smaller engine, The tires get a bit more wiggle room and get a smaller turning radius.
It would likely get that same great MPG but maybe 18city 26highway (2008 testing procedures). Possibly higher MPG if honda fixes the transmission ratios and adds a 6speed automanual. Almost 33k rpm at 60mph is not good... The RDX's bad MPG comes from its higher weight, taller less fuel efficient stance, and higher drag than tsx.
A second engine would probably be the same engine but with two turbos equalling 300hp. Sh-awd is appropriate for that! Thats what you call a Type-S (335i eat your heart out!)! That would be GEN-2 though
Give the Tsx a refresh adding VTM-4 (optional), new rims(The 04/05 were nice) colors, the current 2.3l turbo for a type-s, Nav-traffic and review camera, and new tail lamp design (Honda classic) and let it play out until the Gen-2 comes out.
Quick thought, I think the sports-4 is the tsx as it follows acuras styling direction. The Mdx's grille, the 2007 TL's chrome strips by the fog lights and the squinty headlights that i've always loved! Look at it when reading about my GEN-2 TSX.
-Cj
There isn't a whole lot difference in weight between SH-AWD and VTM-4. Plus, VTM-4 is more about traction, as opposed to performance enhancement capabilities that SH-AWD brings.
That said, no matter how hard Honda tries to make SH-AWD lighter, it will still make the car heavier than it could be without a forced AWD system.
Yes, the sports4 concept was clearly meant to be a study for the next generation European Accord (which is our TSX).
What I was meant was that Acura probably doesn't need to build a coupe to compete with the Audi rival you mention. The Sports4 concept (as shown) delivers similar performance specs and style. No need to go coupe.
Maybe in ten years. I think you're greatly over-estimating the value of the enthusiast in what boil down to an upscale family sedan segment. The 10% of the US market who actually care about driving RWD aren't buying many family sedans.
"Adding SH-AWD as standard equipment or even making it an option is a temporary fix."
That's true enough. But it's a fix that can be used today. And it won't cost nearly as much as building a new assembly line and thus losing the benefits of platform-sharing with the Accord.
What that would allow Acura to do is offer a FWD sedan for the average buyer and also have a sport-oriented car for the enthusiast.
In theory, if Acura built a 400 hp turbo V6 tomorrow, it could be added to an SH-AWD RL or TL within a year or two. Moving to a RWD platform for those vehicles requires at least 3-4 years and far more money.
Zoiks! No, no, no... Quattro weighs 35 kg MORE than SH-AWD.
http://www.thestar.com/Wheels/article/187265
-Cj
I think acura could use a 4passenger (not 2+2) as those sales are slowly increasing. Plus it would be acuras first.
A 4 passenger, 205hp I4 or a 258hp v6. Using accord/TL and TSX parts. A hard top convertible to sell at 36k for I4 and 40k for v6 sounds good to me. IMO, both beat the C70 already. 335i, not as much. Plus with VTM-4 or Sh-awd, it be one of the only convertibles to offer AWD. A plus for those in rain or snow, or other conditions.
-Cj
No sir. There's a hp war in the ELLPS segment. Currently, Acura is at the bottom or near bottom of the list. Addimg more hp to a FWD setup is useless and could be outright dangerous at WOT. IMHO, I really don't believe that the TL is a "family sedan" at heart.
Then her miata, she has no clue... "Mom, its RWD..."
Then apply this to maybe 45% of women, and 35% of men. Yup, ask your neighbors, they just might have no idea....
-Cj
RWD with a good enough ESC&ETC and an effective "off" switch can be as charming as any FWD cars (at least on dry pavement) but without the nose-heavy feel to it. Optional SH-AWD can accomodate those folks live above the snow belt.
Would love to see the next TL-S to have RWD and around 350 HP/330 lb-ft of torque (a turbo V6 maybe...
Family sedans? People don't buy TL or RL thinking "family sedan". They buy them thinking luxury sedans/cars. There's no overestimation, just the reality of the market. Why else would people say that RL should be RWD? The very same reasoning applies to TL.
That's true enough. But it's a fix that can be used today. And it won't cost nearly as much as building a new assembly line and thus losing the benefits of platform-sharing with the Accord.
Acura needs to avoid short term fixes. It doesn't help its image either if the brand is closely coupled to Honda lineup. They need to get the fundamentals right.
I'm not 100% on board with that because I've been hearing it ever since V6 engines starting making more than 200 hp. It's like a line in the sand that keeps getting redrawn. "I dare you to step across this line... now this line... now this line..."
With that said, I generally agree that the compromises necessary to make FWD perform properly with gobs of power are becoming less and less attractive.
But you've missed my point. With SH-AWD, Acura can continue to enjoy the benefits of platform-sharing and still offer a high-powered option for their cars. I'm not talking about putting 400 hp in a FWD car. I'm talking about that kind of power in an AWD car.
Fellahs, if RWD and maximum HP is so important, why is the 4 cyl TSX selling so well? Why has the current TL been such a success story? There's more to these cars than performance.
Sure, "luxury family sedans", then. Most buyers are looking for a sedan with five seats, a trunk, and because they want to treat themselves to something nicer than a Camry, Accord, or Taurus, they go with an ELLS.
Many of the posters in this thread would have us believe they are headed to the track with these cars. The truth of the matter is probably such that looking fast might be a more effective advantage than being fast.
And before you put words in my mouth, no, I'm not suggesting that Acura take the poser route. I'm making a point about the buyers.
"Acura needs to avoid short term fixes. It doesn't help its image either if the brand is closely coupled to Honda lineup. They need to get the fundamentals right."
To a certain extent, I agree with that. And the RL is a good case study. It is fundamentally not up to par for many reasons. To some extent the RDX is in the same boat. However, the TL does not share their problems. It's quite possibly the most successful Acura in the history of the brand.
When I think of getting the fundamentals right, I think of addressing the problems, not the car which the market loves.
And i'd hate to add insult to injury but the FWD 205hp TSX is out selling the 230hp 328(x)i, and 300hp 335(x)i sedans/coupes/wagons.
AND!! The FWD 258hp TL is out selling the TSX.
-Cj
What FWD car has 300+hp? 350+hp? Like I said before, there's a hp war going on and keeping it FWD and adding more hp is useless.
I completely get your point and agree about SH-AWD. However, I believe it should be an option ( to a RWD platform)
In all honesty, back in 2004 the TL shook up the segment. IT offered a tremendous value along with performance and luxury to boot.
2006- the IS and new 3er are introduced
2007- new G and even more powerful 3er are introduced. TL gets a MMC.
Sales are down for the TL by the way.
According to the sales #'s for February, BMW sold 4,953 units of the 328i and 2,366 units of the 328xi.
These figures DO NOT include coupes, wagons and convertibles. Total- 7319
TSX sold 2,769.
TL sold 4,057 units and is 21.5% down from last year.
Most families go after minivans and SUVs if they choose to tread into price territory that is ELLS. People don’t buy TL thinking they are buying family sedans. They think practicality of four seats, not whether they can fit a child seat or two. The same would apply to buyers of 3-series, C-class, CTS, G35, ES350, S60, A4 and so on, all of them competing with TL.
the TL does not share their problems. It's quite possibly the most successful Acura in the history of the brand.
And does that guarantee continued success in the future? Is it better to be the most successful Acura as opposed to striving to be a benchmark car in its class besides the continued sales success? Could you explain why TL sales in first two months of this year have gone down by 21%?
Don’t use an excuse that it is relatively old model, it is again a choice made by Acura to stick to a five year cycle. It just received an MMC, a new “exciting” addition to the lineup and is in its fourth year (not fifth). The last time sales trend resembled in TL’s history was in 2003 but that was also a year marked by transmission issues as well as TL being in its fifth year (not fourth).
A typical January-February sales for TL is 10.5K units. This year, it is down to 7.9K units. So, where did those sales go? While I agree it may be too early to pass a judgment, but given the way things work in this business, if precautionary steps aren’t taken on time, things get delayed considerably and cost. Remember the Accord rear end debacle that cost millions to get around? And it still didn’t help the company. Relying entirely on the past better be history if Acura wants to "advance".
That four-cylinder TSX required maximum horsepower from its engine to sell at the pace it does, otherwise, don’t you think Accord’s 166 HP would have been sufficient as opposed to the 205 HP? FWD may be enough for TSX in its niche, but go up from there and Acura better bring more to the plate.
While many compare TSX to Integra/RSX, I see it as a 4-door Prelude. Now, Prelude was one of my favorite cars, and is no more. It certainly wasn’t due to lack of interest in coupes or else you wouldn’t see Nissan continuing to sell 350Z. It was due to the fact that it was a relatively expensive coupe with FWD and “only” 200 HP. It was also a car that made more sense with MT than with AT that 90% of the market prefers thanks to those horses coming from a normally aspirated motor although, I loved the engine and the same love goes for the TSX.
As far as sales go, TSX has sold reasonably well for Acura, starting with 19K thru nine months in 2003, to 38K in 2006. But to go anywhere from here, a V6 or turbo charging becomes necessary. In TSX, either could work, although physical limitations may ask for forced induction and that’s fine. But when it comes to drive wheels, would you rather have those 260-280 HP being put down solely via front wheels in a 3400 lb car? IMO, optimal would be RWD but at the same time, placement of TSX doesn’t require it at the base end and is fixable with higher power via SH-AWD.
And could we tie TSX sales success to Accord’s failure? While TSX has shown increase in sales every year, Accord’s has fallen drastically. In fact, Accord just had one of its worst years in recent history with only 354K units sold. Combine the sales of TSX to that of Accord, and in 2006, Honda sold 392K units. Compare this to 417K units in 2003.
Honda may have lost some overall sales last year and some of Accord’s buyer made a lateral move to get into TSX instead. While those sales stayed with AHM, for a company to grow it MUST attract new buyers and retain the old ones. The only way to accomplish it is to be more aggressive with Accord (not ridiculously aggressive like they tried in 2003) and at the same time TSX has to maintain its appeal over Accord.
And what about TL? If Accord looked like TL, there would be even less incentive for buyers to spend another $6K to get into the Acura. The bottomline: Honda/Acura need to stop shooting at each others’ feet.
And the FWD Toyota Camry outsells the TSX by a factor of about 8 to 1. So go buy one of those if you think that's an important metric.
I'm not 100% on board with that because I've been hearing it ever since V6 engines starting making more than 200 hp. It's like a line in the sand that keeps getting redrawn. "I dare you to step across this line... now this line... now this line..."
My 1995 Maxima SE 5-speed has 190 hp vs. the 1995 BMW 328i with 189 and both were neck and neck in acceleration w/ 0-60 times of around 6.5-6.7 seconds.
In 2007, the TL-S 6-speed w/ 286 horsepower is in the high 5 second range - better than my 12 year old Maxima, but at the expense of much worse city gas mileage and more than a couple extra handfuls of wheel hop and torque steer to try to control. In 2007, the 335i w/ 300 horsepower is in the high 4 second range - which would be supercar territory in 1995. And it get's the same fuel economy as the 1995 328i. Not to mention that my 8 year old could control the steering wheel under hard acceleration.
Twelve years of adding horsepower to FWD platforms has produced some performance gains, but a 2007 TLS is a heck of a lot closer to a 1995 Maxima than it is to a 2007 335i. Both in acceleration and handling.
If, in fact, Acura wants the TL to compete with the likes of an ES350, the FWD setup isn't an issue. But it's lost a lot of ground to the sport oriented ELLPS just since I bought my 2004 TL 6-speed. And FWD or grossly overweight SH-AWD is too much of an impediment to make up that lost ground. The TL can move forward or backward in the ELLPS segment, but it can't tread water and think it isn't really doing the latter.
I never recommended adding more power to a FWD TL. That is fiction. Didn't say it. Probably haven't ever said it. Will deny having said it, even if you've got pictures.
What I wrote (twice now) was that Acura could add power to an SH-AWD TL.
You're all shooting down an argument I never made.
And finally, yes TL sales are down. It's on the down cycle of it's current generation. As the G35 aged from 2003 - 2006 it too lost sales year over year the last couple of years. That didn't make it a completely unattractive car to buyers.
Personally, I'd like to see Acura make the next gen TL with RWD standard and then SH-AWD as optional for those who want it (i.e. the snowbelt). If they went that direction I think they'd put a whooping on Infiniti and Lexus for sure in the ELLPS market because they've been able to do a heck of a job engineering a FWD vehicle with it's current capabilities. Imagine what those same people could do with RWD. BMW might even take notice.
I personally think the reason why the current TL is so successful is primarily due to its "best bang for the bucks" factor. No other ELLPS can compete with Acura when comes to standard options and gadgetry. A base TL w/o navi at $31K and $33K w/ navi are great deals. Heck, even the $35K TL-S doesn't look bad when comparing to IS350, which starts at $36.5K and 335i at $39K, better yet the TL-S comes with standard navi!!! Also, Acura did a heck of a job to make the TL feet as less FWD as possible. Asides from its nose-heavy feel, the TL is pretty competitive against its RWD rivals performance/handling wise.
Acura is able to keep TL's price down because:
1. only one model to choose from (FWD, 4 door) which saves a lot of production cost.
2. platform sharing with Accord and some other models which I am not aware of (Pilot?)
I seriously doubt that by making TL RWD with SH-AWD as option that Acura could continue to keep the price down. When Acura starting to ask $35K for a base TL and over $40K for a loaded, top of the line, SH-AWD model then that's where the trouble starts...
Thew is difference between those models though. Its probably been said thousands of times. With accord, you get a more powerful engine with the same MPG, more luxurious interior, DVD-Audio w/ surround sound, and if you get the nav, you get NAV-Traffic. On paper, the TL and Accord sound the same. Everywhere else, big difference!
Their shooting their foot by letting the TL out Value the Rl, not the accord to the TL. For $10k less, you get more features, less hp, and no AWD. For $5k less, you get a sportier car, more features, 4hp less and still more MPG.
The TSX for some reason is different. Its a try hard sporty car that impresses. Its smaller, just as expensive (OMG which reminds me; A TSX with nav finally broke the 30k barrier for 2007...) It has a few features the TL has like a smaller engine, better MPG, and folding rear seat. Its my next car. The TL is my Dream car. No matter what, Acura has a sale with me.
Lets talk about Volvo beating honda to a v8...
Lets talk about Volvo beating honda to a v8...
And that would be setting goals very low.
Acura has chosen to follow a five year cycle, so it better have a good excuse to explain a drastically downward trend in sales after just three. And unlike G35, TL was an established model with good sales. G35 started out with 30K in its launch year, and went up to 43K in its fourth year. In fifth, the sales were lower at 40K, but with the redesign, the sales haven’t just jumped, they have increased substantially. Every car competing in the class needs to watch out. Not doing so and relying on past will come back to haunt Acura.
1999-2003 TL was not suffering the same after the fourth year, as this generation is which I think is a huge improvement over the old. In fact, it took a bad press related to transmission issues, final year of the model and announcement of TSX that TL sales dipped in fifth year. To put that in perspective, in Jan-Feb 2003, Acura sold 7.3K units of TL, which is the lowest ever over nine year period. In Jan-Feb 2007, Acura has sold 7.9K units. Over the other seven years, over same period, Acura sold 10-11K units, regardless of the “newness” or “oldness” of the model.
Acura better be prepared with a strong TL next time around or else, as I have already quoted a few weeks ago, it doesn’t take long to go in a downward spiral. Legend sold very well in the past, before it hit its downward spiral. And it took only five years to go from 66K units (1991) to only 36K units (1994). And since then, the Legend/RL name has never recovered, thanks to patch work and lack of proper direction.
Why not? Infiniti and Lexus don’t seem to have problem doing just that. And its not that TL is going to be any cheaper than it is now, with next generation. If it is, then I won’t complain. But the way I see it, we may be talking $35K-$36K for base TL and almost $40K for Type-S before SH-AWD is added to counter FWD limitations. Besides, use of FF platform on RL hasn’t helped it on the cost front anyway. It has definitely helped Infiniti sell more M’s because they don’t need to add the cost and weight of an AWD system to stay competitive. OTOH, to cut costs and offer a lower priced trim, Acura decides to give up real wood in favor of faux since they can’t really push RL as a front driver in that class (or seem to think so).
That said, if Acura adopts RWD for TL, it might pave way for the car to not only compete in sub-40K price class, but people may not have a tough time paying for it in the low 40s with SH-AWD. And $35K and under can belong to TSX.
Year 3rd Gen TL G35 Sedan
2002 - 29,590
2003 - 35,765
2004 77,895 42,800
2005 78,218 42,779
2006 71,348 40,346
Based on those numbers I'd say the 1st gen G35 sales were pretty steady. I'd say the same for the 3rd gen TL with the exception being this year. Could it be the changes to the G35 and BMW 328i are taking some of their market share? There's probably some truth to that.
However, if the TL continues to have their sales down by 21-22% as we've seen in the past few months it'll end up with roughly 55,000 unit sold. So, perhaps the addition of some minor style changes and the Type-S model aren't doing much to sway a lot of buyers but I'm betting Acura will do something slight to increase interest for 2008.
Infiniti was constantly tweaking their 1st gen G sedan year over year. Things such as slight horsepower changes and adding a manual tranny, minor interior improvements, minor exterior style changes, adding more features into the base price, and even adding some options not originally available. Acura could easily follow that business model to improve it's base model and deaden their sales slide somewhat. I'd hardly say the car is in dire straights of becoming extinct.
Rocky
On a more serious note, For acura to increase sales, I think we should see:
- Lighter Cars
- At LEAST 1 RWD model
- Convertible/coupe
Ok. On the lighter cars bit, honda uses Aluminum alloy for the engine right?
What about Magnesium for the engine and rims? I say for a new version of the 3.2l v6 with magnesium. Lowers weight and saves money. That what bmw uses in the new 3.
If not lighter weight, what about shifting more weight to the rear. Battery, full size spare tire, ect?
-Cj
Rocky
And expense is always incurred when a new model is launched. It usually takes a few months to recuperate those costs. In case of S2000, the period was six months.
Toyota/Lexus is a huge company with more cash than god. They can subsidize the IS cars with rebadged Landcruisers, Sequoias, and 4Runners in the Lexus line-up. The two brands are a true full-line manufacturer with offerings from sub-compacts to full-size pickups. If one vehicle falters, or requires help via incentives, they can spread the hurt around.
In the case of Nissan/Infiniti, they have Renault to act as a sugar daddy. Now, I recognize that Renault is not nearly as well off as Toyota, but having them as a sugar daddy is better than no daddy at all. Nissan/Infiniti is also, like Toyota, a full-line manufacturer.
When Lexus introduced the original IS300, its was RWD and followed the BMW model very closely. Magazine reviews placed it very near the top of the class and hailed it as the best 3-series fighter to date. It failed miserably in the marketplace.
Toyota can take that kind of body blow. Acura cannot.
If Acura is going to take a gamble by going RWD, they are far better off doing with the RL. That car has not been a big part of the company's image or business case since 1996.
Or if its in its early days, i hope 2.0 is lighter or something. I think it would be nice if honda came up with an awd that lets you select the driving wheels. FWD, RWD, or AWD.
-Cj
Speaking of Lexus IS, while it was (relatively speaking) a failure compared to 3-series (which car actually gets any close to that benchmark from BMW anyway?), the next generation has advanced IS to sales volume rivaling TL while being more expensive. People may have had trouble paying low 30s for IS300, but they apparently are accepting the IS (despite its weaknesses) in low 40s where even RL can't compete. Whats happening there?
5 years worth of failure to get a car that sells almost as well as the TL? Not a great strategy.
-TL/Vigor, TSX, MDX, RDX, RSX/Integra and the Legend were all great sporty FWD vehicles. MDX and RDX are awd but FWD biased. Acuras approach to things has been different but it always worked out somehow.
The RL has been the only non success. It needs to be larger than the TL and more of a deal. More luxury in it and hopefully Honda will finish a V8 engine.
-Cj
The quest for RWD has nothing to do with "what everybody else is doing". It has to do with fundamental engineering. Why didn't Honda use Accord platform to build a sports car that is S2000? Instead they chose FR platform like everybody else.
There is nothing inventive about using FF platform from everything Honda to everything Acura.
As for TL, one can only hope TL can sell in the future as well as it has in the past. But you haven't gotten my basic point. RL needs help. Can't do without a new platform. And if Honda's way is to consolidate platform and spread out cost to make it profitable quicker, there is no other vehicle in the lineup better suited to help than TL.
Besides, there needs to be consistency in the lineup. Chaotic lineup will take Acura nowhere.
Plus saab had other ergonomic issues that they clean up for 2007. Maybe Acura needs to uses fewer buttons in their cars too without jamming them all into the NAV. Think iDrive for acura if they keep going in their same direction. They already have the joystick in 3 models....
From the Bottom to the top
MDX
IMO, little changes like this makes a difference. Some controls just need to be in the right place. Take the nissan quest 06 & 07 for example.
I do hope acura gets keyless go. An actual START/STOP button instead of the twisty keylike thing in the RL. I like Nissans Smart key in the Altima and the same for Toyota.
Acura does need some more luxurious touches! More power shades, the start button, cooled/heated seats, ect. I'm not saying a recliner and massaging seats like the Lexus460 but I think you get my point...
-Cj
I don;t think Honda was agressive at all in the styling of the 03 Accord I think they were very conservative with the styling especially with the back end styling of the sedan.
Yes some of the old Accord buyers did go to the TSX yes but the 03 Accord's styling also turned off people enough I believe to buy a Toyota Camry, Nissan Altima, or Mazda 6 too.
Also, in 2006 yes Accord sales were down to 354K units like you said and like I said on the paragraph above I believe its to do with the styling(despite the 2006 mid-cycle refresh) but also a new Toyota Camry came onto the market too early in 2006 which I believe contributed to some lost Accord sales.
I agree though Honda has to be more aggressive on the styling of the Accord because people want mid-size cars that have some style to them nowadays. The 08 Accord concept looks promising alot better than the current generation Accord but at the same I don;t think thats saying much. To me anything would be an improvement over the current Accord looks.
Well Honda did the best job they could with the refresh of the current generation Accord I think. To me there was very little Honda could do with on the 06 Accord refresh to make the 06 Accord better recieved to buyers than the 03-05 Accord. BTW, Yeah Honda spent 20 million just to fix the back end of the current generation Accord.
I think the 94-95 Accord had a rear end that people didn't take a liking to either but at least there was things that Honda did(or could do)for the 96 Accord on the styling that buyers took a better liking to the 96-97 Accord better than the 94-95 model.
Well the RDX Acura only planned to sell 20,000 RDX's yearly I think. I remember Honda official Richard Colliver stating on a press release last year that the RDX could add 20,000 units to Acura sales yearly.
"autoboy 16 said: Thew is difference between those models though. Its probably been said thousands of times. With accord, you get a more powerful engine with the same MPG, more luxurious interior, DVD-Audio w/ surround sound, and if you get the nav, you get NAV-Traffic. On paper, the TL and Accord sound the same. Everywhere else, big difference!"
I have to agree with Robert here that Acura's can;t look like Honda's because when people drive a Acura they don;t want other people to mistake it for Honda.
Before I knew the TSX existed(2005), I thought it was the TL! Both look great!
My $.02, I would like to get a TSX instead of the TL or Accord because of my current accord. When I decide to go get one, I would just like a more refreshed version of my current car. 166 hp is less than what I have(170hp v6) and the TSX is more.
The 06 and 95 accord only share names. The TSX looks more like the natural evolution. The 96accord, to the 2002accord, to the Tsx looks like what the line was supposed to be. IMO.
-Cj