I agree that the law of diminishing returns applies more to manual transmissions, in 5-speed/6-speed comparisons, than to automatics. Lower torque/higher revving engines, such as the NA TSX, also benefit more than higher torque/lower revving engines. Incidentally, the '08 VW 5-cylinder gets a 20 hp boost, and a modest torque increase. It'll be interesting to see what happens to gas mileage. My guess is that the 170 hp '08 will be as good or better, MPG wise, as the '07, since mediocre fuel economy is perhaps the biggest drawback for these cars.
I agree but I must admit, for a vehicle with 60+% of it weight on its front wheels, it gets great numbers! The current TL IMO is sportier than the pre08 cadillac CTS.
With RWD, honda can can not only remove some weight from the front wheels, but can also improve things that the TL gets marked down for like the wide turning circle and excessive wear on the front tires.
While we sit here bickering about honda not having a RWD TL, Theres probably one testing rigorously on Nurburgring now! LMAO!
Honda should use some of VW's engineering. EG, the W engine configuration. Combining two common engines to make a beat of an engine. Honda could be able to use 2 2.4l I4s to make 1 4.8l w8 with (180+180=)360hp and (165+165)330lbs ft v8 engine. OMG that would work wonder in the RL right now! But I'd rather honda get RWD ready because 330lbs ft through the front wheels doesn't seem like fun... SH-AWD maybe but RWD biased SH-AWD YEA!!
The Passat is my 1st choice. The TL is my second. IMO, with the passat, your getting more than with the Tl. A nicer Interior, stronger (280hp vs 258hp) better sounding engine. IMO, the Passat represents what the TL is supposed to represent. The best cross between sport and luxury! But the Passat does most things better than the TL(except navigation...).
I haven’t really considered a car beyond TL yet. I prefer to buy cars as opposed to leasing them, so BMW 5-series would be out. 3-series affords an enticing alternative, but I would rather stick with TL in that case. It is a better, more balanced car for my needs. Would love to have RL, but it is way out of my reach as a “purchase”.
Back to 5AT versus 6AT, I took TSX (5AT) specifications, and came up with following numbers, listed by gear, gear ratio, overall drive ratio, calculated 1: 2.65\ 11.77\ 0.44g\46 mph 2: 1.52\ 6.74\ 0.25g\80 mph 3: 1.08\ 4.80\ 0.18g\112 mph 4: 0.77\ 3.43\ 0.13g\157 mph 5: 0.57\ 2.51\ 0.09g\214 mph
This car is geared tall. With 164 lb-ft at 4500 rpm, it can deliver no more than 0.44g thrust, which is mediocre. To provide an idea, its 6MT is geared short, first gear with an overall drive ratio of a healthy 15.55:1. And even if we assume the same drive train loss and curb weight as 5AT version, the difference is astounding. The maximum thrust would be 0.58g in first gear (comparable to Honda’s V6 cars). This is why people find TSX engine better suited with MT but the culprit is Honda’s choice of gear ratios with 5AT. Also note that the gear span is only 4.65:1 (2.65/0.57).
So, I retained everything else (including axle ratio) and came up with the following ratios for a 6AT. Also listed besides them are overall drive ratio, calculated maximum thrust in each gear (at peak torque) assuming 15% drive train loss and maximum possible top speed in each gear (at redline, 7100 rpm): 1: 3.34\ 14.83\ 0.55g\36 mph 2: 2.17\ 9.64\ 0.36g\56 mph 3: 1.63\ 7.22\ 0.27g\75 mph 4: 1.22\ 5.42\ 0.20g\99 mph 5: 0.92\ 4.06\ 0.15g\132 mph 6: 0.55\ 2.45\ 0.09g\220 mph
I shortened the first gear ratio by about 26%. This allowed for a stronger off the line response, by a whopping 26% and comparable to V6 equipped cars. On the flipside, it resulted in a lower top speed at red line (46 mph is down to 36 mph). But that is alright, because it will be made up for in latter gears.
Also note that in current set up, TSX/5AT reaches 80 mph in just second gear. It will take fourth to do so in this new set up. But the advantage is in average thrust generated to get to 80 mph which is much higher with 6AT.
Wider span (6.05:1 versus 4.65:1) also allowed to retain or improve upon cruising rpm in top gear (at 60 mph, down from 1990 rpm in TSX/5AT to 1937 rpm in TSX/6AT). This should also help in improving highway fuel economy by a bit.
Also important to note is that rolling acceleration should improve. A typical Honda 5AT will shift to third under aggressive acceleration. So, a 6AT could shift to fourth. And there, the car would have 10-11% greater thrust on tap compared to 5AT while either transmission would be good enough for speeds well beyond legal limits.
Not only the wider span (6.05:1, typical of 6AT) allows us to have shorter five gears by allowing us closer ratios, it also allowed for a more relaxed top gear.
Even if Honda could bump up the torque from 164 lb-ft to 175 lb-ft, which will be impressive for a 2354 cc engine, that will result in only a 6-7% improvement in thrust if they kept the 5AT ratios. Clearly, it is easier to manufacture greater thrust and better overall performance by way of gearing. Both would be obviously better, but to overlook one (6AT) isn’t helping Honda make a case for the horsepower found in spec sheets.
Now only if I could ask someone at the top of Acura’s management as to why they have been ignoring 6AT...
"Now only if I could ask someone at the top of Acura’s management as to why they have been ignoring 6AT..."
Maybe they'll introduce 6-speed automatics in the next generation models. After all, Acura is quite competitive as things stand, so it may be both smart strategy and smart economics to save some improvements for the next generation.
Whether Acura stays with FWD or converts to RWD, it would be nice if it would make LSD standard.
At least all of hondas transmissions are 5AT. No more ancient 4ATs to mess with. I'm hoping honda as a DSG like auto in the works!! They would sell soooo many more s2k if it offered an automatic. Thats why my mom didn't get one. She got a miata instead. YES SHE CAN DRIVE STICK. Her previous car was a 5MT kia sportage.
Equipping Acuras (not just the "S" models, all TLs and TSXs, at a minimum) with LSD would aid the application of large amounts of torque to 2WD systems, whether FWD or RWD, at least to some extent, and thereby reduce the need for SH-AWD for some drivers. It would also help differentiate Acuras from Hondas, especially if Acura continues to share Honda FWD platforms. Further, it would be a marketing point. This feature would be particularly useful if Acura introduced 6-speed automatics.
Does anyone know how much weight the typical LSD adds? I'm sure it's much less than SH-AWD.
Does anyone know how much weight SH-AWD adds? I noticed that every vehicle equipped with it weighs in at over 4k lbs.
The type S TL has LSD right? Well the TL with Nav weighs in at 3636lbs. The TL Type-S weighs in at 3674lbs. :surprise: An Astonishing 38lbs difference! Lets see... a difference in 28hp, 23lbs ft, is only 38lbs? Not to mention the the 3.2lv6 gets 18/26mpg(or 308miles/445miles) vs the 3.5s 17/26mpg(or 291miles/445miles) both running premium fuel...
The 3.5l v6 just got a whole new level of respect from me! Check out these specs! The cool thing is the 6MT Tl-s weighs 3559lbs... 115lbs less than the auto...
Sticking with a common platform for all is hurting Acura as well as Honda. Accord would be the perfect example. Honda isn’t going to go all out, and will hold back on a few things on new Accord, just so that it doesn’t step on Acura’s foot (TSX and TL, and even RL for that matter). So, a few possibilities are taken away, deliberately.
An alternative would be to redesign the Acuras before they do Honda. But then, Honda is way too stubborn about redesign cycles, and will skimp on lesser Acuras too from the fear of the big gun (RL). And if they redesigned RL then TL then TSX and then Accord, it can’t happen within a few months and if it does then the health of the company will be questionable after 3 years or so, when all of these models start to age at about the same time.
Ideal would be to split the big sedans into two lines, exclusive of each other. Accord/TSX share things, as do TL/RL. Besides, FWD platform adds things to TL/RL that compromise their character, from styling to power trains to ride quality and handling. So, Honda needs to be more flexible, and take advantage of its strengths rather than settle for compromises.
Even if Acura introduces 6AT, I'm afraid, in FWD vehicles, it will come with compromises as opposed to an all-out 6AT. For example, next TL will likely have 260 lb-ft or more going to the front wheels. With RWD and a short/close ratio 6AT, Acura could deliver excellent performance. But if only FWD were involved, then the issue of potential torque steer comes around (with short gearing), and would either require extensive engineering to counter the effect (or reduction in torque in lower gears) or just a run of the mill 6AT which would negate the need to design one with a wide gear span. Wide gear span helps at both ends (short low gears for brisk acceleration, and tall top gear for relaxed cruising and improved fuel economy).
I simply hate to see Honda box itself, and Acura, out, by refusing to change itself and help Acura grow.
SH-AWD is one of the lightest advanced AWD systems around. It is lighter than all but the basic AWD systems like Real Time 4WD (used in CR-V) which are purely reactive systems. As for weight itself, the number is said to be around 220-240 lb. And that is actually light for an AWD system that works in 4WD mode 100% of the time.
But the problem with any additional weight is that it adds even more weight (stronger frame/springs etc to support more weight).
I must admit, for a company building so many vehicles off of two basic platforms (not including RWD s2000), they are doing well! But its time to start bring out new platforms to be more diverse.
Let the Pilot and Ridgeline become true SUVs and trucks. The odyssey can share accord because thats normal. Cr-v, element and RDX should be another platform.
MDX, RL, TL should be RWD stretched for RL and MDX. Accord, TSX, and maybe an upscale accord (non Tl) should share a platform.
Similar to lexus: IS250/350 = TSX ES350 = _L GS350 = TL LS460 = RL
...there'll be yet another entry level luxury competitor, the Pontiac G-8. Since this car will be RWD, it'll compete more directly with its BMW, Cadillac, Chrysler, Infiniti, Lexus and Mercedes counterparts, but it'll take a few sales from the TL as well. I think that if the TL, which until now has performed near the top in comparison evaluations, should slip to below average, it would spur Acura to convert the TL and RL to RWD. They'd probably get new names, of course. I've got to think that the lackluster reception of the RL started Acura thinking more seriously about RWD, and if the TL's image and sales continue to slip, it'll add urgency to the issue. This would leave room for Honda to move its EX upscale a little, especially with the SH-AWD option. The larger Acuras would offer a RWD version of SH-AWD.
And what about the TSX? The Honda EX could stress luxury, while the TSX stresses sport. So, instead of converting to RWD proactively, as some of us would like, Acura may end up doing it reactively, after they've suffered a sales decline. I predict it'll happen by the '14 model year, since the next generation is already baked.
What could derail such a scenario? A sharp increase in fuel prices, from current levels, might cause some of the luxury buyers who assign a higher priority to acceleration than fuel economy, to shift their priorities. This could then shift the emphasis to luxury sport, over sport luxury, and Acura would look brilliant for having anticipated this trend. It may be that if Acura sticks with their current platform sharing approach with Honda, that the primary reason may be that they have factored higher fuel prices into their product equation, since FWD tends to be more fuel efficient than RWD. In this scenario, the economies of scale from platform sharing would be a bonus, rather than the primary motivator for the product plan.
Making Pilot and Ridgeline "real trucks" (as on pure ladder frame chassis) would be taking several steps backwards. They are, where the future is. In fact, Pilot has risen to become one of the top sellers in SUV world. Interestingly enough, the best selling SUVs are CR-V, Escape and Rav4, in that order. Pilot is sixth, and would be fourth best selling SUV if not for far fewer fleet sales. In fact, only two of top ten selling SUVs are what one used to call "real trucks" or based off it.
And having driven Envoy (a free loaner from Acura nonetheless since they ran out of Acuras) and MDX, back to back, I can see why the market has shifted.
Pilot, Odyssey, MDX are fine as is. Ridgeline could benefit from less expensive trims while retaining utility and of course, diesel engine would help most of them.
As far as Acura lineup goes, I think Acura should... -Introduce CSX with 210 HP 2.4/I-4 with "Acura styling" (inside and out) for about $25K. - Let TSX compete in $30K-35K class with FWD base/SH-AWD for the Type-S. - TL would be fine as a larger midsize, but RWD with SH-AWD for Type-S - RL should be full size with RWD and SH-AWD for Type-S (with V8 option).
Sh-awd may need a 2.0 to allow drivers to select the major drive wheels.
Letting the system decide the optimal distribution and design based on chassis' dynamics is better than letting a driver select which is better. If rear bias is preferred, dump AWD altogether and save weight, costs, and improve efficiency. AWD system should bias itself based on needs of the chassis. Besides, when is RWD bias really useful (outside of being a marketing statement)?
I think we would have heard rumors by now if some Acura models will be converted to RWD for '09. I'd be very surprised if the next generation TL is anything but FWD, with SH-AWD as an option or standard.
The first RWD Acura sedan could be the RL, but I think the odds favor the continuation of the FWD based SH-AWD. Look for sportier styling for the RL, though, plus an S variant, in addition to the standard RL.
I'd be very surprised if the next generation TL is anything but FWD, with SH-AWD as an option or standard.
Unfortunately. Honda will try to wait for setbacks before putting things in place properly. I'm afraid TL will go the way of the Legend in the early 90s. Exceptionally well selling vehicle, slowly creeping up in price and struggling to keep up sales pace... The problem with Acura's follow up was the first generation RL, which was chasing Lexus in futility. I hope they don't repeat.
SH-AWD is fine, but it is only what Quattro is to Audi, not a brand to follow if it comes to success in marketing.
According to the August 20 issue of Automotive News, the next generation TSX and TL will be introduced for the '09 model year, and the RL for '11. It will be interesting to see whether SH-AWD will be standard or optional on these.
We have expressed various opinions on why the RL hasn't been very successful, and how we would fix it, but it would be interesting to know what lessons Acura has learned, and its plans for this model. Is Acura coming around on the notion that to compete with the mid and higher end Mercedes, BMWs, and Lexuses, the RL needs to convert to RWD and offer a V8, or are they going to further refine the current drivetrain and make the styling more contemporary? I think a V8 or V10 is in the cards for the '11 RL, but I'm not so sure about RWD. Alternately, Acura could turbocharge its V6 to achieve 300+ horsepower. This would reduce tooling costs compared with introducing a new V8. It would also help keep vehicle weight down, and keep the weight over the front wheels close to 60%.
The maximum amount of power to FWD applications keeps edging up. The '08 Accord V6 ties the Camry V6's 273 hp, and the Taurus delivers 263. I imagine this is achieved in part through ever more refined engineering, to control torque steer, and with low aspect ratio tires (225x50x17 for the '08 Accord V6), to help control wheel spin. While the responsive handling characteristics that these tires deliver on dry pavement are suitable for sport coupes and sedans, they exact a significant penalty for family oriented sedans, in terms of traction on wet, snow, and icy roads, ride quality, turning circle diameter, replacement cost, and resistance to pot holes. The tradeoff is that they produce good numbers, which is great for many Edmunds participants, but less practical for the majority of motorists.
This raises various questions about the '09 TSX and TL. Will SH-AWD be required to tame torque steer, or will Acura pull a rabbit out of the hat, in terms of delivering high torque through the front wheels, in a refned manner. One thing is virtually certain; if it's a Honda product, it'll be refined. How they do it remains a question. It'll be interesting!
The new Accord offers 119 or 120 (I've seen both numbers cited) cubic feet of interior volume, when not equipped with a sun roof, and 101 with a sunroof. This compares with 98 cubic feet for the '08 TL, and 99 cubic feet for the RL. Although size is just one consideration in a vehicle purchase, given how good the '08 Accord is, it makes one wonder how one could justify a TL or RL.
I am convinced that it'll come with FWD standard with SH-AWD as an option and current TL-S' engine will be standard with around 300HP. It'll probably be priced around $35K base and $40K top of the line with SH-AWD. What does that tell me? It tells me that SH-AWD is probably the only way to go since the FWD version is really just a glorified Accord (that's given if the 2 will share platform). I have no doubt that the next TL will sell relatively well but it won't be as successful as the current model during its early years.
With each iteration the Accord kept going up market and FWD TL sort of standing still so the difference between the 2 are shrinking fast. SH-AWD will be a nice addition but I still see the FWD base version as its volume model. Does Honda really want to settle with the idea of that Acura is just a Honda with more toys, slightly better interior and different sheetmetal? Why can't it go the route that Lexus and Infiniti has taken? A RWD biased SH-AWD system will go a long way for Acura.
Let's see what does Honda have to do to further differentiate Acura from Honda. At most, Honda will only need to develop 2 RWD platforms, one for the passenger cars and one for the Crossovers. As matter of fact, Honda can get away with just one. TL, RL, MDX and the future CL can share the RWD platform with TSX and RDX stay on its global FWD. With the new RWD platform Honda can make Acura a legit player in the luxury market.
As for the manual gearbox, doesn't the Accord V6 offer it as well?
It will be very interesting to see what Acura does to make future TLs and RLs relevant, given the size, level of refinement, and luxury of the new Accord EX-L.
I actually believe FWD Acuras are going to be eventually phased out completely in favor of SH-AWD standard, much like Audi. Other sites have speculated that Audi was more the direction Acura was headed rather than chase down BMW so the further implementation of SH-AWD already standard in the RL, MDX and RDX, coming in the next TL and even the rumored AWD TSX seems a logical choice.
I totally agree that the Accord and TL are too similar in their missions. However, Honda did do a very nice job with the styling and the feature content to blurr the lines when the TL bowed in 04'. The TL is still one of the best looking sedans in the segment IMO, chiseled, edgy, muscular, it looks like nothing else IMO. It also had features like bluetooth and higher horsepower when it bowed. The Accord merly caught up in the 08' model.
Pricing wise, sure 35k for a base model TL, loaded to 40 with Navi and entertainment, also right in line with the Audi A4. I also wouldn't count out a coupe form to return to go up against the A5. Hopefully with the rumored V10, the TL won't overlap the RL which really needs to more differentiating IMO.
That thing is just TOO accord ...
Let's see what does Honda have to do to further differentiate Acura from Honda. At most, Honda will only need to develop 2 RWD platforms, one for the passenger cars and one for the Crossovers.
Amen to that. I am crossing my fingers that a new NSX and the next S2000 could lead Honda down that road. But being an Audi cometitor is still not a bad place to be.
Edit: Oh, and the 6-speed manual will only be available in coupe form, no more V6 sedans.
Don't forget all Audi passenger cars come with FWD as base with Quattro as option. I've also read about that Acura is intended to go the Audi route rather than BMW/MB. That's another reason why I speculate the future Acura sedans will come in two flavors: FWD and SH-AWD.
Since Audi is not doing that well in the US I am a little worried about the path Acura choose to go. I just thought a RWD-biased SH-AWD system would give it the advantage that other luxury brands lack.
Yeah there are front-track Audis available but everything they advertise is about quattro. I wouldn't expect a whole lot of front-track models sold each year.
Ex. We had a girl here at work who just picked up a front-track A4 for 22 grand. Apparently the dealer couldn't get rid of it, it had been on the lot for something like 9 months.
Since Audi is not doing that well in the US I am a little worried about the path Acura choose to go.
Audi has a track record of being high maintainence and low reliability. I'd put that in as more of a reason than the drive wheels... I'm not too worried about Acura following that formula since they score higher in reliability coupled with the advantages of an AWD setup.
People have their preferences I guess. Most hardcore folks prefer a rear driver, but the practical side of us know an AWD setup is more usable year around whether it be snow, rain or just freezing temps when tires turn to bricks (I never drive my S2000 in temps below 40 degrees for just that reason).
Trust me, I am on that list of people who would give up my first born for something like an Acura 330i/335i/M3
I wouldn't expect a whole lot of front-track models sold each year.
Actually I'll bet you that at least for sedans there are more front-track Audis sold than Quattro models.
Here in So Cal I see at least 3 front-track Audi A4/A3 to each Quattro. For some reason I don't see many A6s around and the A8 is even more rare.
FWD A4 for 22 grand isn't bad but I'd rather pick Accord V6 over that. I had a rental A4 (FWD of course) for about 2 weeks and I am not impressed.
Trust me, I am on that list of people who would give up my first born for something like an Acura 330i/335i/M3
Amen brother. I am a Honda/Acura loyalist would would love to return to them in the future. An Acura 335i/M3 would certainly do it 3.5 years from now when it's time for me to search for a new ride.
There are a lot of problems with platform sharing, even if Acura had SH-AWD standard. A big one is timing of redesign. With shared platform, we see three of Honda’s (and Acura’s) best selling vehicles get redesigned within a year and then nothing for next four years. It also limits Honda from pushing a few buttons for the Accord.
For example, if I “ruled” Honda, CSX would get a complete makeover, and look very different inside and out compared to a Civic (CSX is basically Japanese Civic). Much like the styling/content differentiation Honda created between Accord and TL. That becomes the entry model for Acura lineup, offered with 210 HP 2.4/I-4 in mid-20s. This car follows Civic redesign.
TSX becomes slightly larger and a dedicated model to North American market (and perhaps offered in Europe/Japan as well, if Acura brand goes there). It could continue sharing platform with Accord, with low pressure turbo K23 (210 HP or so) to begin with, and a high performance Type-S model with SH-AWD to top off the lineup. This warrants enough differentiation from Accord, while being like it.
TL and RL could share a RWD platform, both offered with Type-S variants with SH-AWD as the top trim.
Now, here is how the timing helps (Calendar year) 2005: Civic 2006: CSX redesign 2007: TSX redesign 2008: Accord redesign 2009: RL redesign (Spring 2008) 2009: TL redesign (Fall 2008) 2010: The cycle restarts
This grouping of platform dependent models allows for fresh models virtually every year. And not only that, it affords room for Acura/Honda to be more aggressive with its offerings. Right now, Honda can’t afford a sport tuned Accord sedan it will hurt TSX and TL. That’s prime example of boxing itself out, and giving an upper hand to competition.
Pretty much agree with your vision for Acura. Now if I get a chance to rule Honda/Acura I'll:
Get rid of CSX once for all, replace it with a coupe version of the TSX. The TSX (coupe and Sedan) should come standard with the 240HP turbo I4 and FWD. The top of the line TSX-S will have SH-AWD and 300HP 3.5L V6.
TL and RL will share the RWD platform with SH-AWD as an option. TL will have the standard 3.5L V6 at 300HP and the Type-S model would get the V10 (or V8) detuned at around 380HP. RL will get only one engine choice, 400+HP V10 (or V8). Oh, btw, make a coupe version out of the TL as well.
The NSX should round off the passenger car lineup very nicely at the top with the 500HP V10 and RWD biased SH-AWD.
I don't have any suggestions for the crossover lineup except maybe drop the 3.5L V6 into the RDX. People just don't like the idea of a luxury SUV/CUV with a 4 banger whether there is a turbo or not.
One more thing, if I am the King of Acura the very first thing I'll do is replace the fake wood, aluminum trim with the real thing. That's the least Acura can do to lift it's brand image from pseudo-luxury to real luxury.
The Camry and Accord V6s, and other mid priced family sedans, are approaching 300 horsepower, making more hp irrelevant, in my view. Where the heck are you going to use >300 hp, except on a track? A V10; who needs it? I mean, if 10 cylinders - and the cost of ownership that goes with it -are so wonderful, why stop there? Why not a V12, or W16, with twin or quadruple turbochargers, of course? At what point does the horsepower race become not only irrelevant, but insane? I'm not advocating reducing horsepower, but am I the only one here that feels that more power, from these levels, more or less, is ceasing to be a positive differentiater?
This is one reason why Acura will have to find other ways to differentiate itself from Honda. SH-AWD doesn't hold much appeal for me, because of the added weight and power loss associated with four drive wheels vs. two. Therefore, if the next TL's major difference is a few more ponies than the Accord, plus SH-AWD, which will eat up some or all of the additional power, I'll go for the Honda EX-L, or a RWD alternative. For the winter months I'll buy an extra set of wheels and mount snow tires, which will permit me to out- stop, and maybe out-turn a SH-AWD Acura on slippery surfaces. I'll return to Acura when it offers a RWD TSX or TL, with Turbo I-4 and V6, respectively, with near 50-50 weight distribution.
I think Honda/Acura has the greatest ability, among the Asian manufacturers, of unseating the Germans, in the $30,000-$50,000 or $60,000 price range.
Finally Acura is breaking the 5 Speed Auto transmission mold. It's taking them a while but Honda wants to do it right the first time. All acuras will eventually have SH-AWD.
In the motor trend magazine i got yesterday, there was a page about the GS-F from Lexus. It will be a V10 powered m5 fighter. But it is not approved yet and if it is, it wont be available until 2011 when the next GS hits showrooms.
Honda is starting to fall even further behind! While its true that many people dont need a v10, many do want a v8, 6MT, and/or RWD car. Honda is starting to forget all that racing heritage lately. 1 RWD car thats almost 10years old and nothing new(i imagine an automatic tranny would help sales...), the v6 powered supercar of the 90s is gone and a successor is becoming lost, and the legend is a legend and the closest thing to that original formula is the TL.
I think honda should really use VWs idea with the W engine or VV engine.. So far, honda could have a VV8(2 2.4l I4s ~360hp). Or Acura could use turbos the way the BMW has. I do highly reccommend SH-AWD if more HP is added.
Well I can't post the link but its from some acura salesman who knows a honda employee. The spy pics are the new TL from what I have heard. Some say the TSX will be another rebadged euro/jdm accord or could be a unique vehicle. This upcoming TL wont come until the fall of next year. TSX could come as early as this spring. The spy pic vehicles are quite quick around corners. The photographer said it really performed well. As always it will get SH-AWD.
don;t they just get rid of the TSX? The only reason why Honda even elected why to put the TSX in the Acura line-up was because of the Mazda 6 and Subie Legacy and Honda didn;t have anything else that size to compete with the Mazda 6 and Legacy.
I just don;t like the new Accord looks either maybe I'll look at 2010 TSX from the 2013 model year when I can buy one used because the last 2 gen Accords just don;t do anything for me in terms of looks.
"I think that if the TL, which until now has performed near the top in comparison evaluations, should slip to below average, it would spur Acura to convert the TL and RL to RWD. They'd probably get new names, of course."
That'll be 2 strikes against Acura if they dump the TL name due to the fact that they dumped the Legend name-plate after the 1995 model year in the US and I think it was a mistake of them to dump the Legend nameplate.
"I've got to think that the lackluster reception of the RL started Acura thinking more seriously about RWD, and if the TL's image and sales continue to slip, it'll add urgency to the issue."
My thinking why current TL sales slipping are because of newer redeigned 2007 models like the Infinti G35 and Lexus ES350. I still can't imagine buying a ES350(yes even the new one)over a TL because I have heard the the ES has a reputation for a very soft ride when compared to the TL's ride which combines a good median between sport and luxury. The ES's 350 exterior looks are weak as well. The G is more legit contender to the TL as well as will be the new Caddy CTS but I have seen some real life pics from different auto mags of the CTS it looks like GM did a good job on the 08 CTS exterior because the exterior line's look to flow better than on the 03-07 CTS exterior and the rear end styling has been cleaned up good as well. The 08 CTS's interior still isn't as good as the current TL's though even though the interior for the 08 CTs is improved from the 03-07 model.
Aside from the CTs, G35, and ES350 the TL will always have the BMW 3 Series to compete with.
"The Passat is my 1st choice. The TL is my second. IMO, with the passat, your getting more than with the Tl. A nicer Interior, stronger (280hp vs 258hp) better sounding engine. IMO, the Passat represents what the TL is supposed to represent. The best cross between sport and luxury! But the Passat does most things better than the TL(except navigation...). "
Vw has its attributes but reliability is far from one of their strong attributes I mean Acura has a much better reputation from a reliability standpoint than VW. historically.
"Amen brother. I am a Honda/Acura loyalist would would love to return to them in the future. An Acura 335i/M3 would certainly do it 3.5 years from now when it's time for me to search for a new ride."
Yeah lets just let the BMW fans mock us Honda/Acura fans if Acura ever came out with a car named the 335i.
but whats lost in reliability is lost in the repairs to the TL in case of an accident! But besides, nowadays, there is no such thing as reliable. Backstabbing friends, recalls on peanut butter and toy cars, and fleeing dogs! Lately, reliable just doesn't exist!
But loyalty is a different story, and thats my vote toward acura vs vw! Every dog has his day!
Comments
Incidentally, the '08 VW 5-cylinder gets a 20 hp boost, and a modest torque increase. It'll be interesting to see what happens to gas mileage. My guess is that the 170 hp '08 will be as good or better, MPG wise, as the '07, since mediocre fuel economy is perhaps the biggest drawback for these cars.
What would be your second choice, after the TL?
With RWD, honda can can not only remove some weight from the front wheels, but can also improve things that the TL gets marked down for like the wide turning circle and excessive wear on the front tires.
While we sit here bickering about honda not having a RWD TL, Theres probably one testing rigorously on Nurburgring now! LMAO!
Honda should use some of VW's engineering. EG, the W engine configuration. Combining two common engines to make a beat of an engine. Honda could be able to use 2 2.4l I4s to make 1 4.8l w8 with (180+180=)360hp and (165+165)330lbs ft v8 engine. OMG that would work wonder in the RL right now! But I'd rather honda get RWD ready because 330lbs ft through the front wheels doesn't seem like fun... SH-AWD maybe but RWD biased SH-AWD YEA!!
-Cj
-Cj
Back to 5AT versus 6AT, I took TSX (5AT) specifications, and came up with following numbers, listed by gear, gear ratio, overall drive ratio, calculated
1: 2.65\ 11.77\ 0.44g\46 mph
2: 1.52\ 6.74\ 0.25g\80 mph
3: 1.08\ 4.80\ 0.18g\112 mph
4: 0.77\ 3.43\ 0.13g\157 mph
5: 0.57\ 2.51\ 0.09g\214 mph
This car is geared tall. With 164 lb-ft at 4500 rpm, it can deliver no more than 0.44g thrust, which is mediocre. To provide an idea, its 6MT is geared short, first gear with an overall drive ratio of a healthy 15.55:1. And even if we assume the same drive train loss and curb weight as 5AT version, the difference is astounding. The maximum thrust would be 0.58g in first gear (comparable to Honda’s V6 cars). This is why people find TSX engine better suited with MT but the culprit is Honda’s choice of gear ratios with 5AT. Also note that the gear span is only 4.65:1 (2.65/0.57).
So, I retained everything else (including axle ratio) and came up with the following ratios for a 6AT. Also listed besides them are overall drive ratio, calculated maximum thrust in each gear (at peak torque) assuming 15% drive train loss and maximum possible top speed in each gear (at redline, 7100 rpm):
1: 3.34\ 14.83\ 0.55g\36 mph
2: 2.17\ 9.64\ 0.36g\56 mph
3: 1.63\ 7.22\ 0.27g\75 mph
4: 1.22\ 5.42\ 0.20g\99 mph
5: 0.92\ 4.06\ 0.15g\132 mph
6: 0.55\ 2.45\ 0.09g\220 mph
I shortened the first gear ratio by about 26%. This allowed for a stronger off the line response, by a whopping 26% and comparable to V6 equipped cars. On the flipside, it resulted in a lower top speed at red line (46 mph is down to 36 mph). But that is alright, because it will be made up for in latter gears.
Also note that in current set up, TSX/5AT reaches 80 mph in just second gear. It will take fourth to do so in this new set up. But the advantage is in average thrust generated to get to 80 mph which is much higher with 6AT.
Wider span (6.05:1 versus 4.65:1) also allowed to retain or improve upon cruising rpm in top gear (at 60 mph, down from 1990 rpm in TSX/5AT to 1937 rpm in TSX/6AT). This should also help in improving highway fuel economy by a bit.
Also important to note is that rolling acceleration should improve. A typical Honda 5AT will shift to third under aggressive acceleration. So, a 6AT could shift to fourth. And there, the car would have 10-11% greater thrust on tap compared to 5AT while either transmission would be good enough for speeds well beyond legal limits.
Not only the wider span (6.05:1, typical of 6AT) allows us to have shorter five gears by allowing us closer ratios, it also allowed for a more relaxed top gear.
Even if Honda could bump up the torque from 164 lb-ft to 175 lb-ft, which will be impressive for a 2354 cc engine, that will result in only a 6-7% improvement in thrust if they kept the 5AT ratios. Clearly, it is easier to manufacture greater thrust and better overall performance by way of gearing. Both would be obviously better, but to overlook one (6AT) isn’t helping Honda make a case for the horsepower found in spec sheets.
Now only if I could ask someone at the top of Acura’s management as to why they have been ignoring 6AT...
Maybe they'll introduce 6-speed automatics in the next generation models. After all, Acura is quite competitive as things stand, so it may be both smart strategy and smart economics to save some improvements for the next generation.
Whether Acura stays with FWD or converts to RWD, it would be nice if it would make LSD standard.
At least all of hondas transmissions are 5AT. No more ancient 4ATs to mess with. I'm hoping honda as a DSG like auto in the works!! They would sell soooo many more s2k if it offered an automatic. Thats why my mom didn't get one. She got a miata instead. YES SHE CAN DRIVE STICK. Her previous car was a 5MT kia sportage.
-Cj
Does anyone know how much weight the typical LSD adds? I'm sure it's much less than SH-AWD.
The type S TL has LSD right? Well the TL with Nav weighs in at 3636lbs. The TL Type-S weighs in at 3674lbs. :surprise: An Astonishing 38lbs difference! Lets see... a difference in 28hp, 23lbs ft, is only 38lbs? Not to mention the the 3.2lv6 gets 18/26mpg(or 308miles/445miles) vs the 3.5s 17/26mpg(or 291miles/445miles) both running premium fuel...
The 3.5l v6 just got a whole new level of respect from me! Check out these specs! The cool thing is the 6MT Tl-s weighs 3559lbs... 115lbs less than the auto...
-Cj
An alternative would be to redesign the Acuras before they do Honda. But then, Honda is way too stubborn about redesign cycles, and will skimp on lesser Acuras too from the fear of the big gun (RL). And if they redesigned RL then TL then TSX and then Accord, it can’t happen within a few months and if it does then the health of the company will be questionable after 3 years or so, when all of these models start to age at about the same time.
Ideal would be to split the big sedans into two lines, exclusive of each other. Accord/TSX share things, as do TL/RL. Besides, FWD platform adds things to TL/RL that compromise their character, from styling to power trains to ride quality and handling. So, Honda needs to be more flexible, and take advantage of its strengths rather than settle for compromises.
Even if Acura introduces 6AT, I'm afraid, in FWD vehicles, it will come with compromises as opposed to an all-out 6AT. For example, next TL will likely have 260 lb-ft or more going to the front wheels. With RWD and a short/close ratio 6AT, Acura could deliver excellent performance. But if only FWD were involved, then the issue of potential torque steer comes around (with short gearing), and would either require extensive engineering to counter the effect (or reduction in torque in lower gears) or just a run of the mill 6AT which would negate the need to design one with a wide gear span. Wide gear span helps at both ends (short low gears for brisk acceleration, and tall top gear for relaxed cruising and improved fuel economy).
I simply hate to see Honda box itself, and Acura, out, by refusing to change itself and help Acura grow.
SH-AWD is one of the lightest advanced AWD systems around. It is lighter than all but the basic AWD systems like Real Time 4WD (used in CR-V) which are purely reactive systems. As for weight itself, the number is said to be around 220-240 lb. And that is actually light for an AWD system that works in 4WD mode 100% of the time.
But the problem with any additional weight is that it adds even more weight (stronger frame/springs etc to support more weight).
Let the Pilot and Ridgeline become true SUVs and trucks. The odyssey can share accord because thats normal. Cr-v, element and RDX should be another platform.
MDX, RL, TL should be RWD stretched for RL and MDX. Accord, TSX, and maybe an upscale accord (non Tl) should share a platform.
Similar to lexus:
IS250/350 = TSX
ES350 = _L
GS350 = TL
LS460 = RL
-Cj
And what about the TSX? The Honda EX could stress luxury, while the TSX stresses sport. So, instead of converting to RWD proactively, as some of us would like, Acura may end up doing it reactively, after they've suffered a sales decline.
I predict it'll happen by the '14 model year, since the next generation is already baked.
What could derail such a scenario? A sharp increase in fuel prices, from current levels, might cause some of the luxury buyers who assign a higher priority to acceleration than fuel economy, to shift their priorities. This could then shift the emphasis to luxury sport, over sport luxury, and Acura would look brilliant for having anticipated this trend. It may be that if Acura sticks with their current platform sharing approach with Honda, that the primary reason may be that they have factored higher fuel prices into their product equation, since FWD tends to be more fuel efficient than RWD. In this scenario, the economies of scale from platform sharing would be a bonus, rather than the primary motivator for the product plan.
If the TL gets aimed at the CTS instead of the ES, We'll have a winner. IMO, Sh-awd may need a 2.0 to allow drivers to select the major drive wheels.
-Cj
And having driven Envoy (a free loaner from Acura nonetheless since they ran out of Acuras) and MDX, back to back, I can see why the market has shifted.
Pilot, Odyssey, MDX are fine as is. Ridgeline could benefit from less expensive trims while retaining utility and of course, diesel engine would help most of them.
As far as Acura lineup goes, I think Acura should...
-Introduce CSX with 210 HP 2.4/I-4 with "Acura styling" (inside and out) for about $25K.
- Let TSX compete in $30K-35K class with FWD base/SH-AWD for the Type-S.
- TL would be fine as a larger midsize, but RWD with SH-AWD for Type-S
- RL should be full size with RWD and SH-AWD for Type-S (with V8 option).
Perhaps a CL between TL and RL too.
Letting the system decide the optimal distribution and design based on chassis' dynamics is better than letting a driver select which is better. If rear bias is preferred, dump AWD altogether and save weight, costs, and improve efficiency. AWD system should bias itself based on needs of the chassis. Besides, when is RWD bias really useful (outside of being a marketing statement)?
The first RWD Acura sedan could be the RL, but I think the odds favor the continuation of the FWD based SH-AWD. Look for sportier styling for the RL, though, plus an S variant, in addition to the standard RL.
Unfortunately. Honda will try to wait for setbacks before putting things in place properly. I'm afraid TL will go the way of the Legend in the early 90s. Exceptionally well selling vehicle, slowly creeping up in price and struggling to keep up sales pace... The problem with Acura's follow up was the first generation RL, which was chasing Lexus in futility. I hope they don't repeat.
SH-AWD is fine, but it is only what Quattro is to Audi, not a brand to follow if it comes to success in marketing.
We have expressed various opinions on why the RL hasn't been very successful, and how we would fix it, but it would be interesting to know what lessons Acura has learned, and its plans for this model. Is Acura coming around on the notion that to compete with the mid and higher end Mercedes, BMWs, and Lexuses, the RL needs to convert to RWD and offer a V8, or are they going to further refine the current drivetrain and make the styling more contemporary? I think a V8 or V10 is in the cards for the '11 RL, but I'm not so sure about RWD. Alternately, Acura could turbocharge its V6 to achieve 300+ horsepower. This would reduce tooling costs compared with introducing a new V8. It would also help keep vehicle weight down, and keep the weight over the front wheels close to 60%.
This raises various questions about the '09 TSX and TL. Will SH-AWD be required to tame torque steer, or will Acura pull a rabbit out of the hat, in terms of delivering high torque through the front wheels, in a refned manner. One thing is virtually certain; if it's a Honda product, it'll be refined. How they do it remains a question. It'll be interesting!
Honda, what are you thinking?
I am convinced that it'll come with FWD standard with SH-AWD as an option and current TL-S' engine will be standard with around 300HP. It'll probably be priced around $35K base and $40K top of the line with SH-AWD. What does that tell me? It tells me that SH-AWD is probably the only way to go since the FWD version is really just a glorified Accord (that's given if the 2 will share platform). I have no doubt that the next TL will sell relatively well but it won't be as successful as the current model during its early years.
With each iteration the Accord kept going up market and FWD TL sort of standing still so the difference between the 2 are shrinking fast. SH-AWD will be a nice addition but I still see the FWD base version as its volume model. Does Honda really want to settle with the idea of that Acura is just a Honda with more toys, slightly better interior and different sheetmetal? Why can't it go the route that Lexus and Infiniti has taken? A RWD biased SH-AWD system will go a long way for Acura.
Let's see what does Honda have to do to further differentiate Acura from Honda. At most, Honda will only need to develop 2 RWD platforms, one for the passenger cars and one for the Crossovers. As matter of fact, Honda can get away with just one. TL, RL, MDX and the future CL can share the RWD platform with TSX and RDX stay on its global FWD. With the new RWD platform Honda can make Acura a legit player in the luxury market.
As for the manual gearbox, doesn't the Accord V6 offer it as well?
I totally agree that the Accord and TL are too similar in their missions. However, Honda did do a very nice job with the styling and the feature content to blurr the lines when the TL bowed in 04'. The TL is still one of the best looking sedans in the segment IMO, chiseled, edgy, muscular, it looks like nothing else IMO. It also had features like bluetooth and higher horsepower when it bowed. The Accord merly caught up in the 08' model.
Pricing wise, sure 35k for a base model TL, loaded to 40 with Navi and entertainment, also right in line with the Audi A4. I also wouldn't count out a coupe form to return to go up against the A5. Hopefully with the rumored V10, the TL won't overlap the RL which really needs to more differentiating IMO.
That thing is just TOO accord ...
Let's see what does Honda have to do to further differentiate Acura from Honda. At most, Honda will only need to develop 2 RWD platforms, one for the passenger cars and one for the Crossovers.
Amen to that. I am crossing my fingers that a new NSX and the next S2000 could lead Honda down that road. But being an Audi cometitor is still not a bad place to be.
Edit: Oh, and the 6-speed manual will only be available in coupe form, no more V6 sedans.
Since Audi is not doing that well in the US I am a little worried about the path Acura choose to go. I just thought a RWD-biased SH-AWD system would give it the advantage that other luxury brands lack.
I will pray that this never happens. More weight. More cost. More drive train loss. Worse fuel economy...
"Machine Maximum, Man Minimum" (exact opposite of Soichiro Honda's words).
Ex. We had a girl here at work who just picked up a front-track A4 for 22 grand. Apparently the dealer couldn't get rid of it, it had been on the lot for something like 9 months.
Since Audi is not doing that well in the US I am a little worried about the path Acura choose to go.
Audi has a track record of being high maintainence and low reliability. I'd put that in as more of a reason than the drive wheels...
People have their preferences I guess. Most hardcore folks prefer a rear driver, but the practical side of us know an AWD setup is more usable year around whether it be snow, rain or just freezing temps when tires turn to bricks (I never drive my S2000 in temps below 40 degrees for just that reason).
Trust me, I am on that list of people who would give up my first born for something like an Acura 330i/335i/M3
Leave the front drive stuff to the Accords and Civics.
Actually I'll bet you that at least for sedans there are more front-track Audis sold than Quattro models.
Here in So Cal I see at least 3 front-track Audi A4/A3 to each Quattro. For some reason I don't see many A6s around and the A8 is even more rare.
FWD A4 for 22 grand isn't bad but I'd rather pick Accord V6 over that. I had a rental A4 (FWD of course) for about 2 weeks and I am not impressed.
Trust me, I am on that list of people who would give up my first born for something like an Acura 330i/335i/M3
Amen brother. I am a Honda/Acura loyalist would would love to return to them in the future. An Acura 335i/M3 would certainly do it 3.5 years from now when it's time for me to search for a new ride.
For example, if I “ruled” Honda, CSX would get a complete makeover, and look very different inside and out compared to a Civic (CSX is basically Japanese Civic). Much like the styling/content differentiation Honda created between Accord and TL. That becomes the entry model for Acura lineup, offered with 210 HP 2.4/I-4 in mid-20s. This car follows Civic redesign.
TSX becomes slightly larger and a dedicated model to North American market (and perhaps offered in Europe/Japan as well, if Acura brand goes there). It could continue sharing platform with Accord, with low pressure turbo K23 (210 HP or so) to begin with, and a high performance Type-S model with SH-AWD to top off the lineup. This warrants enough differentiation from Accord, while being like it.
TL and RL could share a RWD platform, both offered with Type-S variants with SH-AWD as the top trim.
Now, here is how the timing helps (Calendar year)
2005: Civic
2006: CSX redesign
2007: TSX redesign
2008: Accord redesign
2009: RL redesign (Spring 2008)
2009: TL redesign (Fall 2008)
2010: The cycle restarts
This grouping of platform dependent models allows for fresh models virtually every year. And not only that, it affords room for Acura/Honda to be more aggressive with its offerings. Right now, Honda can’t afford a sport tuned Accord sedan it will hurt TSX and TL. That’s prime example of boxing itself out, and giving an upper hand to competition.
Get rid of CSX once for all, replace it with a coupe version of the TSX. The TSX (coupe and Sedan) should come standard with the 240HP turbo I4 and FWD. The top of the line TSX-S will have SH-AWD and 300HP 3.5L V6.
TL and RL will share the RWD platform with SH-AWD as an option. TL will have the standard 3.5L V6 at 300HP and the Type-S model would get the V10 (or V8) detuned at around 380HP. RL will get only one engine choice, 400+HP V10 (or V8). Oh, btw, make a coupe version out of the TL as well.
The NSX should round off the passenger car lineup very nicely at the top with the 500HP V10 and RWD biased SH-AWD.
I don't have any suggestions for the crossover lineup except maybe drop the 3.5L V6 into the RDX. People just don't like the idea of a luxury SUV/CUV with a 4 banger whether there is a turbo or not.
One more thing, if I am the King of Acura the very first thing I'll do is replace the fake wood, aluminum trim with the real thing. That's the least Acura can do to lift it's brand image from pseudo-luxury to real luxury.
This is one reason why Acura will have to find other ways to differentiate itself from Honda. SH-AWD doesn't hold much appeal for me, because of the added weight and power loss associated with four drive wheels vs. two. Therefore, if the next TL's major difference is a few more ponies than the Accord, plus SH-AWD, which will eat up some or all of the additional power, I'll go for the Honda EX-L, or a RWD alternative. For the winter months I'll buy an extra set of wheels and mount snow tires, which will permit me to out- stop, and maybe out-turn a SH-AWD Acura on slippery surfaces. I'll return to Acura when it offers a RWD TSX or TL, with Turbo I-4 and V6, respectively, with near 50-50 weight distribution.
I think Honda/Acura has the greatest ability, among the Asian manufacturers, of unseating the Germans, in the $30,000-$50,000 or $60,000 price range.
Honda is starting to fall even further behind! While its true that many people dont need a v10, many do want a v8, 6MT, and/or RWD car. Honda is starting to forget all that racing heritage lately. 1 RWD car thats almost 10years old and nothing new(i imagine an automatic tranny would help sales...), the v6 powered supercar of the 90s is gone and a successor is becoming lost, and the legend is a legend and the closest thing to that original formula is the TL.
I think honda should really use VWs idea with the W engine or VV engine.. So far, honda could have a VV8(2 2.4l I4s ~360hp). Or Acura could use turbos the way the BMW has. I do highly reccommend SH-AWD if more HP is added.
I just don;t like the new Accord looks either maybe I'll look at 2010 TSX from the 2013 model year when I can buy one used because the last 2 gen Accords just don;t do anything for me in terms of looks.
That'll be 2 strikes against Acura if they dump the TL name due to the fact that they dumped the Legend name-plate after the 1995 model year in the US and I think it was a mistake of them to dump the Legend nameplate.
My thinking why current TL sales slipping are because of newer redeigned 2007 models like the Infinti G35 and Lexus ES350. I still can't imagine buying a ES350(yes even the new one)over a TL because I have heard the the ES has a reputation for a very soft ride when compared to the TL's ride which combines a good median between sport and luxury. The ES's 350 exterior looks are weak as well. The G is more legit contender to the TL as well as will be the new Caddy CTS but I have seen some real life pics from different auto mags of the CTS it looks like GM did a good job on the 08 CTS exterior because the exterior line's look to flow better than on the 03-07 CTS exterior and the rear end styling has been cleaned up good as well. The 08 CTS's interior still isn't as good as the current TL's though even though the interior for the 08 CTs is improved from the 03-07 model.
Aside from the CTs, G35, and ES350 the TL will always have the BMW 3 Series to compete with.
Vw has its attributes but reliability is far from one of their strong attributes I mean Acura has a much better reputation from a reliability standpoint than VW. historically.
Yeah lets just let the BMW fans mock us Honda/Acura fans if Acura ever came out with a car named the 335i.
But loyalty is a different story, and thats my vote toward acura vs vw!
-Cj
Could this be the new Benchmark ELLPS ?????
-Rocky