Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

2010 Acura TSX



  • mintoobmintoob Posts: 13
    Hey folks,

    I was browsing among these forums 2 yrs back when I bought MDX. We are thinking of buying a second car and we have zeroed in on 2010 TSX v4 with Tech. So far we have a quote of 200$ below invoice + Destination charge + Taxes + free all season mats.

    I was wondering if anyone out there has a better price quote and suggestions. I am in the tri state and can buy it from any where pretty much.

    Thanks bunch folks

  • nyccarguynyccarguy Stamford, CTPosts: 11,592
    Glad you found my review helpful. What other cars are you looking at? The best thing to do is go and drive the cars. The TSX really felt right for me.

    2001 Prelude Type SH, 2015 Infiniti Q40 AWD, 2017 Honda Pilot Touring AWD

  • bvdj84bvdj84 Posts: 1,724
    Well, that is all good, but I have a GM lease that has 23mth's left. I want out!! So bad!! I have been told to do a lease transfer, but I am still on the fence with that.
    I am not sure what I should do. And honestly how much I am upside down. With good deals out now, it could help offset it. Apparently I am about $6,000 upside down. That was back in early May. From my dealer, but I haven't tried any other dealers. And don't know if that was a realistic number, but my trade is low on KBB for an 08 car.

    You know, if you want something, you gotta make it happen, so I am looking at the
    VW Jetta Wolfsburg edition(red) Honda Accord EX-L V6, or a TSX 4cyl.
    People trade all the time, so maybe I am not trying hard enough and being forceful enough.
  • bvdj84bvdj84 Posts: 1,724
    Based on the reviews found on the internet as well. I really didn't find too much negativity about the car. I was so impressed with the 06 Accord 4cyl engine I had. I can only imagine its capability on this car. I am thinking that the 4cyl tech model will be the car for me. I wanted an Accord, but this car is a step up.

    I have not test driven the car. I have been holding off on that, as I am a little bit stuck in the car I have now, and that would be a torture to drive one and not get one. But, I still might do it anyway. I just need to have someone tag along with me. With great lease deals, it seems like I can get one for not much more than I am paying now, so that is a good thing.

    I like the fact that it lets you use paddleshifters, sport mode, and I am very impressed with the capability of the navigation unit. That has a cool wow factor to it.
  • smarty666smarty666 Posts: 1,503
    was just at my local Acura dealer the other night looking at the 2010 TSX; Acura makes really nice vehicles but their PR, design, and marketing department always seems to screw up big time when it comes to pricing and marketability; a fully loaded 2010 TSX V6 with nav was $38,760; who in their right mind would pay that much for a TSX really; I mean for just about the same price maybe a few hundred dollars more you can be a in a base TL with the nav system for around $39k and your getting more car for your money; suffice it to say your getting a uglier looking car but if you don't care about the snow plow grill on the front of the TL then that is the better way to go; Acura really screwed up the pricing on the V6 TSX; this reminds me of how Acura has always screwed up their top of the line RL; I mean for over $10k less you can be in a 09 TL SH-AWD with tech than a top of the line RL and with the TL your getting a bigger car and bigger engine; there is no point to the RL the way Acura has it and then they sit there a wonder why the RL doesn't sell well; Acura better get their design and marketing departments straightened out because they have enough competition from Lexus, Infiniti, BMW, and Mercedes not to have their own departments screw up an take away from their own products , namely the RL and TSX by screwing up with pricing and car dimensions
  • fedlawmanfedlawman Posts: 3,118
    "for just about the same price maybe a few hundred dollars more you can be a in a base TL with the nav system for around $39k and your getting more car for your money."

    What makes the TL more car for the money? It's physically larger, but that's about it. Same Accord platform, same engine/transmission, same suspension, same features, etc.

    "I mean for over $10k less you can be in a 09 TL SH-AWD with tech than a top of the line RL and with the TL your getting a bigger car and bigger engine; there is no point to the RL the way Acura has it and then they sit there a wonder why the RL doesn't sell well."

    The TL and TSX are brand-new designs while the current RL is a legacy vehicle (introduced 5 years ago). The new RL will be in a whole different league from the TL and TSX when it appears next year.
  • smarty666smarty666 Posts: 1,503
    the TL was always based on the accord platform but the 09TL is far different than the 08TL so I don't understand how you can say its still the same TL; I have a 2008 TL and the suspension, engine, and sheetmetal and exterior design is radically different in the 09 TL then the 08 TL because I test drove the new TL to see what they changed and it was astonishing how drastically everything changed with this car in just one year

    being the TL is physically larger inside and outside you get more car for almost the same amount of money; you can not make a logical explanation that by getting the TSX V6 loaded your getting more car for your money because your not; the TSX is smaller in almost every dimension and volume; the rear seat in the TSX is completely useless for passengers and trust me I've tried when I've had one as a loaner car from my Acura dealer; if you compare the TL and TSX V6 side by side on the Acura website you'll see a couple areas where the TL has advantages over the TSX; I was only stating that for Acura to price the the TSX V6 so high that you'll be better off getting a TSX V4 then a loaded V6 to get more money's worth and better gas mileage which is more bang for our buck! and that if you want the V6 get the TL; if the prices of the TSX V6 tech and Base TL tech are almost the same why not get more room and comfort by getting the TL; it just makes financial sense unless Acura tries to pull some BS with the financing rate or leasing rate on the TSX V6 that make it more attractive to get than the TL financially then you might be right but that is all a wait and see what Acura does game

    in regards to the RL, it was refreshened for 2009 and they could have made adjustments but the RL has never sold well and I'm sorry the new TL SH-AWD loaded is far superior to the RL in price, size, engine, etc;there is no logical reason to get a RL right now if only to say I'm driving a Acura RL; I've read these kind of reviews by MotorTrend, Car and Driver, and Consumer reports so my thoughts are backed up by professional reviewers; the only way Acura is going to bring the RL back from obscurity is to completely redesign it and dump a RWD or AWD V8 engine into for 2011; unless Acura is willing to do this in order to compete with the top of the line sedans with V8's from Infiniti, Lexus, BMW, Audi, and Mercedes it will never sell well
  • I noticed on the Acura website that the TSX displays the PSI for each tire. I always seem to have trouble keeping my tires properly I find this feature invaluable. Do all Acruas have the this feature? Do any competitors offer this feature?
  • smarty666smarty666 Posts: 1,503
    My 2008 TL has this feature and I love it; it really comes in handy when the seasons/temperatures change because it changes the PSI in my tires and this display tells me which ones need air; I think Nissan has this feature as well; I had a 2008 altima one time as a rental car and it had it on it; I don't know what other manufactures have it though
  • cdnpinheadcdnpinhead Forest Lakes, AZPosts: 4,143
    They all have it now it now because of the legal system in the U.S. Well, that and the fact that American drivers can't be troubled to look after their vehicles -- owning & using a tire gauge is part of driving a vehicle, just like checking the oil. Yeah, I know, nobody does either any more. . .and here we are.

    The Ford Explorer (Exploder) fiasco a few years ago revealed that Americans can't be bothered to check their tire pressures & will sue (or their heirs will) when it's revealed that low tire pressure was a contributing factor to the rollover.

    Ain't America great? Tort reform? We don't need no stinkin' tort reform.

    We apparently don't need people who look after their vehicles either.

    Oh boy.
  • nyccarguynyccarguy Stamford, CTPosts: 11,592

    I was at the Acura Dealer yesterday & checked out the TL & TSX as my wife test drove the I-4 TSX (that poor salesman :P ). I don't know about dimensions, but the TL definitely seemed to have more room. Now as far as trunk space goes, I'd have to give the nod to the TSX. The TL might have more cargo volume, but the TSX has a very large, usable trunk. They are too close in price, but I'm sure Acura figured out somehow that TSX buyers are not cross shopping the TL (either way, if they are, Acura wins)

    But using your argument (retorically speaking), why go for a 4cyl TSX when you can get a loaded EXL-V6 NAV Accord for the same (or less money)? Like I said above, people aren't cross shopping the TSX & the Accord.

    fedlawman: You guys have a Volvo right? Which one, what do you think of it (obviously it isn't your E30 M3), & would you buy another one?

    2001 Prelude Type SH, 2015 Infiniti Q40 AWD, 2017 Honda Pilot Touring AWD

  • fedlawmanfedlawman Posts: 3,118
    "the 09TL is far different than the 08TL so I don't understand how you can say its still the same TL."

    I never did say that.

    "if the prices of the TSX V6 tech and Base TL tech are almost the same why not get more room and comfort by getting the TL."

    Because some people prefer a more compact package.

    "in regards to the RL, it was refreshened for 2009..."

    It got some cosmetic tweaks, but it's still the same 5 year-old car. The new RL coming out next year (reported to have Honda's first production V8) should compare very well with it's intended rivals.
  • fedlawmanfedlawman Posts: 3,118
    Well put NYC. The reason some people prefer the TSX to the TL is the same reason why some choose the TSX over the Accord. Size. The TSX is a more compact car that is arguably sportier (at least in 4 cyl trim) and more fun to drive. For young urban up and comers, why choose a larger sedan when you can have a right-sized one?

    Yes, I think we have the perfect mix of cars for our family. The M3 to play with on the weekends, and the Volvo V70 wagon for the family during the week. Our Volvo has the rear-facing 3rd row seat, so we can haul 4 adults and 3 kids (!!!) to the movies if we need to. We love our Volvo (it's been a fantastic, comfortable & luxurious touring car and has been utterly reliable), but with almost 100K miles, I've have been checking out new cars. So far, nothing out there is a worthy replacement. I like the new V70, but I don't think it's as good a car as the previous generation (it's more refined, but the new 3.2L V6 can't touch my 30+ MPG hwy economy), and since Volvo stopped offering the 3rd row (only the V90 has it), it's not an option for us.

    Of all the new cars I've looked at with 3 rows of seating, the Acura MDX would be my choice if I had to buy a new "wagon" today. It's very nice. If I didn't need three rows, then I'd strongly consider the Hyundai Genesis. It's the nicest $30,000 car on the market.

    But as it stands, $250 for a timing belt change and $300 for front & rear brake rotors, and our 2004 should be good for many miles to come. It's a great car and I see no reason to part with it.
  • nyccarguynyccarguy Stamford, CTPosts: 11,592
    Thanks for your reply. I'm obviously pushing for the TSX, but in the end, she's going to be the one driving it & will have to live with the car for the next 8 years or so (I'd push for 10 :P ).

    After driving the X3 for the past 2 years, she feels like she's sitting too low in the TSX (that's what I like about it), so she's going to drive it again.

    She likes the Volvo because it has true wagon cargo space behind the seats (as opposed to the 3 series & A4 wagons with their raked rears that rob cargo space. The Volvo V70 is a nicely styled wagon. I have a feeling that most dealers here will only have XC70s in stock (AWD+heaftier price tag+even worse gas mileage = not for us).

    2001 Prelude Type SH, 2015 Infiniti Q40 AWD, 2017 Honda Pilot Touring AWD

  • fedlawmanfedlawman Posts: 3,118
    Well, the V70 doesn't sit any higher than the TSX. Except for the great cargo room in the rear, it feels like any other mid-size sedan (with the best seats in the business).
  • smarty666smarty666 Posts: 1,503
    well if you are looking for something compact then the TSX is def your car; I guess it is just personal preference; for almost the same amount of money I'd rather be in a bigger vehicle but thats just me; I did like the V4 when I had the loaner TSX at the end of last year; something I liked with the TSX was how sharp and crisp its handling is; consumer reports rated its handling a 8 while the TL is 7; the only car I have ever driven that had the same kind of crisp handling like the TSX had was a G37 coupe which is saying something!! bravo for Acura on the handling on the TSX!!!

    If it true that the 2011 RL will have Honda's first production V8 that will most likely solve the problem the RL has had all along!! hopefully that will make the RL sell better and compete much more with the V8 sedans by Lexus, Infiniti, BMW, etc
  • fedlawmanfedlawman Posts: 3,118
    Nit pick here, but the TSX has an I-4, not a V-4 engine.

    I remember when the current RL came out in 2005, it really impressed as a beautiful sedan. The press raved about it's handling too. It's biggest problem was price - it was just too expensive for what you got. Still is.

    I also think that, although logically the TSX V6 should cost the same as the base TL because arguably, it costs the same to manufacture, the $5,000+ premium over the I-4 TSX is hard to justify. Personally, I think the turbo I-4 from the RDX would have been a much better choice for the TSX.
  • smarty666smarty666 Posts: 1,503
    yeah the turbo I4 in the RDX is a really nice engine; the torque is more than in even some V6 engines; its a shame Acura didn't put the turbo I4 in the TSX; that would have made for sweet [non-permissible content removed] ride!
  • fedlawmanfedlawman Posts: 3,118
    And it would have kept the line between the TSX and TL distinct. Two different cars with different characters.
  • nyccarguynyccarguy Stamford, CTPosts: 11,592
    Ok guys, so the Volvo is OUT. The dealer didn't have any V70s on the lot (said the 2010s would be out in November), but could get me a great deal on an '09 XC70. I told the gentleman that I'd like to drive the car first before we start to discuss any type of pricing. So he got a 3.2L (They make a T6 with Turbos too...yummy) XC70 from the back & we took it out for a test drive. First off, the plastic body cladding is a total turn-off for me (he said it makes the car more macho). Second, the XC is really geared toward the SUV crowd as I felt like I was sitting ON the car. The seat wouldn't go down far enough. The steering was vague, the ride was very comfortable, there was tons of space. The engine was buzzy & wheezed along like it smoked 3 packs a day. The salesman asked my wife if she wanted to drive the car next...I said no thanks for her.

    Who knows why Honda chose to put the V6 in the car instead of the Turbo 4 from the RDX. They thought that people would pay a price premium for a V6 over an I4, but not a Turbo I4 over a NA I4. A V6 is more refined. Some people think a 4cyl is a 4cyl turbo or no turbo.

    The V6's numbers look better on paper (marketing wise) as it pumps out 280 Horsepower, 79 more than the NA I4 & 40 more than the Turbo 4. The V6's torque is 84 lb-ft more than the NA I4 & only 6 lb-ft less than the Turbo 4 (Remember, we Americans BUY horsepower, but want torque). As far as gas mileage goes, the FWD RDX gets 1 mpg more than the TSX V6 in the city (on paper). Anyone who has ever owned a Turbo knows they get awful gas mileage in the city. The V6 TSX is rated at 27 MPG Highway vs. 24 for the RDX FWD (Turbo). Turbos also have lots of extra plumbing and even though modern turbos are built to last, a V6 is more durable due to the fact that it is less complicated.

    Now I'm just playing devil's advocate on the part of Honda. I'd love it if the TSX were available with the Turbo 4.

    I also think Honda needs to develop a 6-speed (or 7 speed) automatic to get the acceleration numbers down & fuel economy numbers up for the V6 & the Turbo 4.

    We're going back to the Acura dealership tomorrow so my we can test drive the car again & maybe strike a deal. Wish us luck!

    2001 Prelude Type SH, 2015 Infiniti Q40 AWD, 2017 Honda Pilot Touring AWD

  • I was test driving a TSX the other day and the dealer said that Acura officially has they do not require/recommend this anymore on the new TSX's. Sorry, I cannot remember whether his said require or recommend. So I will just use them simultaneously.

    My first question was: Is this in the instruction manual? His response "I dont think so in the 09's, but it may be in the 2010's manual. I haven't checked yet. But we did get a press release from Acura saying 'they no longer recommend/require premium fuel in the TSX's'"

    Anyways, I've been trying to find this "press release" online that shows this. Has anyone seen this or can confirm it? I was still planning to put premium fuel in the car, but if Acura has officialy stopped recommending/requiring it, I would reconsider.

    Can any 2010 owners check their user manual?
  • fedlawmanfedlawman Posts: 3,118
    What difference does it make? Whether it's official or not, the engine is the same as it has always been.

    Use whatever type of gas you want - it won't hurt the car.
  • roubaudroubaud Posts: 58
    My 2010 auto base w/ tech manual says premium is highly recommended, but you can use 87 octane minimum but expect engine knocking and added wear on engine.
  • fedlawmanfedlawman Posts: 3,118
    i-VTEC is more than capable of adjusting valve timing to mitigate detonation. I suppose if you went out of your way to lug your engine in 5th gear all day, every day, for 5 years, then you might experience accelerated engine wear.

    But premium gas only costs an extra $0.20/gallon. Your paying $30,000 for a premium sedan - paying an extra $2.00 each tankful so your engine runs as the engineers intended is cheap insurance if you ask me.
  • nj2pa2ncnj2pa2nc Posts: 813
    89,000+problem free miles, more than enough power, excellant gas mileage on my 06 tsx, using regular gas. My brother's volvo cost a lot more than my tsx and he also uses regular gas. My mom's accord cost $30,000-does that mean she should use premium gas. What does the car price have to do with the gas.
  • cdnpinheadcdnpinhead Forest Lakes, AZPosts: 4,143
    What does the car price have to do with the gas?

    If you're driving a 16-year-old rusted-out hulk, then saving twenty cents a gallon is, if nothing else, consistent with your lifestyle.

    Driving a $30K vehicle that recommends (some require, but the TSX isn't one) spending that $100/year extra implies that you can afford it, so why not? In many cases the computer takes care of the effects of running 87 octane in an engine designed for 91, but the effect is often lower fuel mileage from retarding the ignition. Result -- no savings & possible net loss.

    When I go to higher elevations here "out west" (5K ft or more), I'll run regular all day long -- they sell a lot of 85 octane gasoline is Colorado. The only engines that need premium at high elevations are turbocharged.

    To each their own, I guess.
  • nj2pa2ncnj2pa2nc Posts: 813
    While on our cross country road trips (including Colorado) the premium gas in some states was cheaper than the regular gas. We still bought regular. We also noted that the gas stations that had 85 octane, the highest octane was 90. We can afford paying for premium but personally when we did use it- no improvement in gas mileage, power or performance. Use what works for you. We also have all the service done by the acura dealer since we can afford that, also.
  • fedlawmanfedlawman Posts: 3,118
    "What does the car price have to do with the gas."

    Nothing. It's the manufacturer's recommendation that should guide you.

    My Volvo V70 does not require premium gas, so I use regular. My BMW M3 requires premium gas, so I use it exclusively.

    By the way, just because you can't detect detonation, doesn't mean your TSX isn't experiencing detonation at certain times. Knocking can be very dramatic and obvious (especially in old cars), but it is often undetectable. Just because you can't hear/feel it doesn't mean it's not occurring. You may never climb hills or drive under part-throttle. Someone else may lug the engine frequently and cause undetected detonation. You may never have a problem with your TSX, but the person who buys it second hand 3, 5, or 8 years from now may be looking at a premature engine rebuild. There's just no way to know.

    The way I figure it, the engineers that designed the car probably know more than I do about the best way to operate and maintain my car. To my mind, using regular gas in a car designed for premium is no different than trimming the costs in other areas...

    Stretch your oil change intervals from the recommended 7,500 to 10,000 miles. Drive 5,000 miles past the wear bars on your tires. Shake the dirt out of your air filter when it's time to replace it. Change your fuel filter at 40,000 instead of 30,000 miles. Add a mere 10,000 miles to your transmission fluid service interval, etc.

    You'll save hundreds of dollars each year and most likely never notice a difference in the performance/reliability of your car.
  • nj2pa2ncnj2pa2nc Posts: 813
    At the rate I am going my car will have over 100,000 miles when it turns 3 years old in Nov. I previously owned a 1991 Mazda Mx-6 GT and a 1998 Eagle Talon TSI-AWD. When we sold them the mazda had 250,000+ miles and the talon had 125,000+ miles. They both had their original turbo, engine, transmssion, clutch and ran excellent using regular gas (like with the tsx, premium gas was recommended not required.) My tsx has a oil life maintance minder which I follow. I also get my tires balance when they are rotated. The original OEM michelins lasted 74,000 miles. They were measured as a 4 so they still had tire life left. I still had the original brakes, rotors, battery and will be getting the brake and manual transmission fluids changed in Nov (3 years as recommended by the owners manual). The owners manual also states not to use octane below 87 which I follow.
    One more thing-the new owners of the mazda has over 300,000 miles on it-still running excellent-just needed to be repainted and new seat covers. We made sure it had proper maintenance-oil changes, etc.
  • fedlawmanfedlawman Posts: 3,118
    I don't know the specs, but I'm sure the TSX engine has a significantly higher compression ratio than those older turbo cars.

    At least you follow good maintenance practices. It does beg the question though - why are you so fastidious about oil, fluids, tires, etc. but blasé about gasoline?
This discussion has been closed.