If you made the switch to a hybrid or EV this year and are happy with the savings you're getting on gas costs, a reporter would like to speak with you. Please reach out to [email protected] by 12/5 for more details.

2015 Acura TLX SH-AWD Long-Term Road Test - Introduction

Edmunds.comEdmunds.com Member, Administrator, Moderator Posts: 10,281
edited March 2015 in Acura
image2015 Acura TLX SH-AWD Long-Term Road Test - Introduction

We added an all-new 2015 Acura TLX SH-AWD to our long-term fleet to see if it has what it takes to replace not one, but two models in the company's lineup.

Read the full story here


Comments

  • emajoremajor Member Posts: 332
    A very good choice for a long-termer. I really like the idea of a fairly sporty sedan from Acura, as the brand has a reputation for reliability and decent driving dynamics. However, reviews so far are pretty tepid on this car, making it seem a bit sterile and unengaging, especially in V6 trims. With the gimmicky looking compound insect eye LED headlights, carryover Acura beak, and bland, bland, bland sheetmetal, it certainly doesn't look like an entry level luxury sedan. Frankly, an Accord has more presence on the road. It will be interesting to read what your impressions.
  • banhughbanhugh Member Posts: 315
    Consumer Reports suggest that the Impala is better for many thousand dollars less.
  • s197gts197gt Member Posts: 486
    edited March 2015
    "The manufacturer provided..." no surprise there. i mean, who buys these things new?

    a base "luxury" vehicle with a 200 hp NA 4 cylinder and $32k price tag to start...

    there's your problem.

    other than that they have toned down the beak and the rest of the car looks pretty decent if not memorable. honda/acura has its moments but in general... what a waste of potential.

    the 2000 honda civic si was the first new car i ever looked at. unfortunately i didn't graduate college until 2001 and by then they had ruined it.


  • thepuffthepuff Member Posts: 87
    BanHugh...did hell freeze over. I never thought I would see the day that Consumer Reports would recommend any American car over a Honda or Toyota. They have been playing the whole reliability BS for these makes for years.
  • bankerdannybankerdanny Member Posts: 1,021
    I have to agree with S197 about the base engine. Acura is at least 40hp down on its competitors and much more than that in torque.

    I like the understated shape just fine, I can even live with the beak. But for $32k I expect a stronger engine. A fully loaded Passat startes $6k less than the base price of the TLX. The 1.8TSI has about 20 fewer HP, but the same torque 2,000 rpm's lower. For about $4k more than the base TLX the Passat V6 offers 280hp, 60 more ft/lbs torque 1,700 rpms lower and and touch screen nav.

    The TLX doesn't seem to offer much in the way of value and it doesn't offer enough prestige to offset the lack of value
  • zimtheinvaderzimtheinvader Member Posts: 580
    It is funny, when the 2009 TL came out for a little bit the used 2004-2008 prices were decent and then the used prices shot up as people realized they like those better.

    Both the TL and TSX would have benefited from slight enhancements rather than 'bold' re-dos back then. They were both solid cars with good followings. Acura squandered that and even came out and said that they knew a lot of people didn't like the beak but they were sticking with it anyways.

    I wish more car companies would learn that if you have something good just keep making it better rather than start all over with each update.
  • kshankarkshankar Member Posts: 175
    Too bad no manual transmission is available on both engines. I believe the previous gen TL Type S had manual transmission with AWD and V6.
  • zimtheinvaderzimtheinvader Member Posts: 580
    edited March 2015
    thepuff said:

    ...... They have been playing the whole reliability BS for these makes for years.

    Resale value still quite often spanks the domestics. Two cars I considered back in 2013 were the Buick Regal and Acura ILX. With trim levels with similar starting prices the ILX trade in value with 70,000 miles comes in about $5,000 higher than the regal right now.

    Right or wrong, people are still far less afraid of a higher mileage Honda than GM



  • banhughbanhugh Member Posts: 315
    thepuff said:

    BanHugh...did hell freeze over. I never thought I would see the day that Consumer Reports would recommend any American car over a Honda or Toyota. They have been playing the whole reliability BS for these makes for years.

    So you agree with the statement that the new Impala is better?
  • iforyou1109iforyou1109 Member Posts: 4

    I have to agree with S197 about the base engine. Acura is at least 40hp down on its competitors and much more than that in torque.

    I like the understated shape just fine, I can even live with the beak. But for $32k I expect a stronger engine. A fully loaded Passat startes $6k less than the base price of the TLX. The 1.8TSI has about 20 fewer HP, but the same torque 2,000 rpm's lower. For about $4k more than the base TLX the Passat V6 offers 280hp, 60 more ft/lbs torque 1,700 rpms lower and and touch screen nav.

    The TLX doesn't seem to offer much in the way of value and it doesn't offer enough prestige to offset the lack of value

    Actually, ~200hp is pretty normal in this segment for a base engine. Here are some examples:
    320i : 180hp/200lbft; $33.5k+; 0-60mph: 6.5s
    IS250: 204hp/185lbft; $36.5k+; 0-60mph: 7.5s (AWD 7.8s)
    ATS 2.5: 202hp/191lbft; $34k+; 0-60mph in 7.4s
    TLX 2.4: 206hp/182lbft; $32k+; 0-60mph in 6.8s

    In particular, the ATS 2.5 also uses a NA 4 cylinder engine and its starting pricing is even more expensive than the TLX 2.4.

    And I think we all know that the TLX in its base form is the most equipped model out of the above 4 cars.

    That's not to say the TLX is the best car. The TLX for starter does not have RWD. But I think it's important to get the facts straight. The above tells me the base TLX has the lowest base price while being above average in terms of straight line performance. In fact, the TLX has a higher 1/4 mile trap speed than the 320i. It indicates to me that the 320i is very good at getting off the line for a decent 0-60mph run, but after that, the TLX would catch up.

    As for the Passat, I don't understand what you mean by "fully loaded Passat STARTS at $6k less than the TLX base price." Are you looking at the fully loaded price, or the start price? The 1.8T Sport starts at $27k, that's $5k less than the TLX, not $6k. Once you get an automatic and a different paint color, the price becomes $29k, which is $3k less than TLX. At that level however, it doesn't come close to the TLX in terms of features. For instance, this Passat has halogen headlights instead of fully LED headlights, 6-speed auto instead of 8-speed dual clutch, rearview cam vs multiview rear cam, just to name a few.

    The 280hp Passat V6 that you mentioned starts at $36k. and you are correct that's about $4k more than the base TLX. However, if you want power, then there's also the 290hp TLX that starts at just above $35k. While the Passat V6 comes standard with navigation, again, the TLX has LED headlights, a better reear cam, and 9-speed auto instead of 6-speed. The TLX V6 is also faster by quite a bit as it does 0-60mph in the 5's while the Passat V6 needs over 6 seconds. Besides, you can get a Accord V6 Touring which has navigation, adaptive cruise control, full LED headlights, etc for $33.5k.



  • schen72schen72 Member Posts: 433
    I'm not really sure why people dislike the beak so much. When it first came out on the previous TL, it was indeed hideous, but subsequent versions look pretty good to me. I also like the conservative styling on Hondas and Acuras. Even though they are not that exciting to look at, in 10-15 years they will still look handsome and not tacky. Some cars look very trendy now, but in 15 years i guarantee you it will look ridiculous.
  • subatomicsubatomic Member Posts: 140
    Beautiful car. I am glad that Edmunds got the V-6/SHAWD model. I think that this is the only model that can truly hold its own with all of the high-powered rear-wheel-drive biased competitors out there. If the all-season tires prove to be too conservative, I would be curious to see what this car could do with high performance summer tires. By the way....when is there going to be a road test of the 400 hp RLX SHAWD? It seems like there should have been some testing and evaluation by now.
  • meteor10meteor10 Member Posts: 59
    Looks pretty nice and sounds that it will be a good selling cars though. But don't like front headlights. don't know why exactly)
  • henry4hirehenry4hire Member Posts: 106
    I own a 2006 Acura TSX and it is such a sweetheart of a car. I take her to the track about every three months and do quite well with some light mods. It is my daily driver that has had zero breakdowns in 83,000 miles, and barely any maintenance aside from oil and brakes. I love this car and she takes care of all my desires (are we talking about cars here?). With that being said....I would NEVER buy an Acura past 2008. They got super fugly, all the sport went out the door (suspension changed), the beak is hideous, no more manuals!!! WTF Honda? What happened? You were so cool and fun and affordable and now you are none of those. Makes me sad. Drop in that Turbo-4 into this car with a stick and change the grill...then I might be interested. Why hast thou forsaken me Honda? :(
  • arcticbluetsxarcticbluetsx Member Posts: 79

    I own a 2006 Acura TSX and it is such a sweetheart of a car. I take her to the track about every three months and do quite well with some light mods. It is my daily driver that has had zero breakdowns in 83,000 miles, and barely any maintenance aside from oil and brakes. I love this car and she takes care of all my desires (are we talking about cars here?). With that being said....I would NEVER buy an Acura past 2008. They got super fugly, all the sport went out the door (suspension changed), the beak is hideous, no more manuals!!! WTF Honda? What happened? You were so cool and fun and affordable and now you are none of those. Makes me sad. Drop in that Turbo-4 into this car with a stick and change the grill...then I might be interested. Why hast thou forsaken me Honda? :(

    I agree with you 100%- I have a 2007 TSX, with just over 100,000 miles, and cannot find anything to replace it with. Fortunately, it's just past break-in so I have plenty of time to decide.
  • s197gts197gt Member Posts: 486


    Actually, ~200hp is pretty normal in this segment for a base engine. Here are some examples:
    320i : 180hp/200lbft; $33.5k+; 0-60mph: 6.5s
    IS250: 204hp/185lbft; $36.5k+; 0-60mph: 7.5s (AWD 7.8s)
    ATS 2.5: 202hp/191lbft; $34k+; 0-60mph in 7.4s
    TLX 2.4: 206hp/182lbft; $32k+; 0-60mph in 6.8s

    In particular, the ATS 2.5 also uses a NA 4 cylinder engine and its starting pricing is even more expensive than the TLX 2.4.

    And I think we all know that the TLX in its base form is the most equipped model out of the above 4 cars.

    good reference points.

    none of those cars are big sellers. (feel free to prove me wrong.)

    none of them are very desirable. the ATS is a flop and very overpriced; particularly with the NA 4 cylinder.

    the 320i is probably the most appealing to me because, well, we own an e90 and z3... so... but i also know it is under rated in hp/tq and also i am sure that there is a tune out there in the aftermarket that would provide even more hp/tq.

    the is250 is probably the second most interesting. my friend had one in AWD and liked it quite a bit.

    but the main thing that attracts me to all of them over the TLX is they are RWD based. win automatically over the TLX.

    i definitely wouldn't take this over an a3/a4 with the 2.0T; another under rated and very tune-able motor.

    so you made me expand a bit on my answer.... still... ANY "luxury" manufacturer offering a NA 4 cylinder model is only doing it to reach an advertising price point to get you in the door and then up-sell you on a higher model. (except for Audi/BMW/Lexus who have the brand cache to charge more. they will ALSO get you on the fact that a bare bones 320i or A3/A4 doesn't exist. the closest you will get is their lease specials.)

    except acura. i get the sense that their NA 4 cylinder model will have a higher expected percentage of sales than an ats/320i/is250...
  • iforyou1109iforyou1109 Member Posts: 4
    s197gt said:


    Actually, ~200hp is pretty normal in this segment for a base engine. Here are some examples:
    320i : 180hp/200lbft; $33.5k+; 0-60mph: 6.5s
    IS250: 204hp/185lbft; $36.5k+; 0-60mph: 7.5s (AWD 7.8s)
    ATS 2.5: 202hp/191lbft; $34k+; 0-60mph in 7.4s
    TLX 2.4: 206hp/182lbft; $32k+; 0-60mph in 6.8s

    In particular, the ATS 2.5 also uses a NA 4 cylinder engine and its starting pricing is even more expensive than the TLX 2.4.

    And I think we all know that the TLX in its base form is the most equipped model out of the above 4 cars.

    good reference points.

    none of those cars are big sellers. (feel free to prove me wrong.)

    none of them are very desirable. the ATS is a flop and very overpriced; particularly with the NA 4 cylinder.

    the 320i is probably the most appealing to me because, well, we own an e90 and z3... so... but i also know it is under rated in hp/tq and also i am sure that there is a tune out there in the aftermarket that would provide even more hp/tq.

    the is250 is probably the second most interesting. my friend had one in AWD and liked it quite a bit.

    but the main thing that attracts me to all of them over the TLX is they are RWD based. win automatically over the TLX.

    i definitely wouldn't take this over an a3/a4 with the 2.0T; another under rated and very tune-able motor.

    so you made me expand a bit on my answer.... still... ANY "luxury" manufacturer offering a NA 4 cylinder model is only doing it to reach an advertising price point to get you in the door and then up-sell you on a higher model. (except for Audi/BMW/Lexus who have the brand cache to charge more. they will ALSO get you on the fact that a bare bones 320i or A3/A4 doesn't exist. the closest you will get is their lease specials.)

    except acura. i get the sense that their NA 4 cylinder model will have a higher expected percentage of sales than an ats/320i/is250...
    Whether any of the above is desirable or not is another topic. My point is that at the low $30k price point, these are what you can get. And while these other cars have RWD, and I understand that it's a very important factor, it's also true that the TLX in that form offers the most features. The fact is that to get these other cars similarly equipped as the base TLX, you will end up paying even more money.

    The A4 2.0T engine is more powerful and has significantly more torque than the base TLX, But the base price is $35.5k and at that point, you can get the 290hp TLX V6. Also, the $35.5k A4 comes with a CVT, which isn't exactly desirable if you are a car enthusiast, right?

    I agree that the models I mentioned above are mostly for getting customers into the showroom. It will be a tough ask to find a base 320i for instance. This in my opinion is what makes the base TLX stand out a bit more. While the TLX is already very well equipped at $32k with decent performance, handling, and ride comfort, you are looking at $36k or more for others in this class. And at $36k, you can either get a TLX 2.4 Tech that is pretty much fully loaded, or a TLX V6 that is faster than 328i, A4 2.0T, C300, and is just as fast as a IS350, ATS 3.6, etc.

    In the end, it's all based on personal priorities. If RWD is your thing, then forget the A4 or TLX. But in terms of features, performance, handling, ride comfort, etc, the TLX is a pretty solid entry in this segment.
  • s197gts197gt Member Posts: 486
    edited March 2015
    ok ok ok. so you are saying that the TLX is a great value argument.

    except it isn't.

    Fusion Titanium AWD MSRP $30,290
    200S AWD MSRP $29,025
    Legacy Limited 3.6R MSRP $29,595

    considering you can get the fusion at invoice and the 200S below invoice those are the real values. with 0% offers from ford and chrylser you are saving $4-5K over an acura whose only unique offerings are 4-wheel steering, LED headlights, and presumably a slightly nicer dealership experience.

    i am sure you might say that the TLX doesn't compete with any of those cars and first, i'd disagree, and second i'd argue it doesn't really compete with BMW, Cadillac, or Lexus.

    acura is to honda what lincoln is to ford. just the next trim level up from the parent company; hardly viewed as a distinct manufacturer and not seriously considered by most luxury vehicle consumers. the mere fact you have to make the value argument proves it isn't a true luxury manufacturer. the koreans understand that...

    that is to say, someone who is looking at bmw, cadillac, or lexus probably never even considers an acura. conversely, someone looking at the acura might consider a bmw, MB, lexus, infiniti, lesux, etc...

    if they are looking specifically for AWD midsize sedans they probably will also consider the fusion, 200S/C, and legacy. most likely they are just honda fanboys looking for the next trim level up.
  • redskinsdmvredskinsdmv Member Posts: 52
    I got to drive it and it was pretty dull to be honest. You can't question the value you get relative to the competitors, but it felt neither sport nor luxury. It still felt like it took too much from Honda products too.
  • hdluffyhdluffy Member Posts: 12
    sexy in that coffee color! Once this thing gets a Manual I will buy it in white. lol SHAWD V6 6MT. Still waiting.
  • benjaminhbenjaminh Member Posts: 6,096
    edited March 2015
    Largely because of the large number of SUVs sold, Acura is actually now 4th behind the big 3 of luxury (BMW, MB, and Lexus). Believe it or not, Acura has sold more vehicles in Jan and Feb of 2015 than Audi or Cadillac. And what's moved them ahead has been the decent sales success of the TLX, which is slightly outselling the combined sales of the two models it replaced.
    2018 Acura TLX 2.4 Tech 4WS (mine), 2018 Honda CR-V EX AWD (wife's)
  • bbrutusbbrutus Member Posts: 3
    Edmunds why not the TLX with the 4cyl, it is more exciting then the 6cyl, has a great 8sp and is really the spiritual successor to the TSX, lets not mention the absolute bang for your buck in this segment. See it in person on the road with the jewel-eye it looks anything but dull. 90% of people buying these cars do not take the 9/10 extra supposed RWD prowess, it is all about badge and that is where the Acura loses... but those that don't care it really is a car that does everything well, and people snarking at the 2.4 have not driven the car, since it is quick, quiet and fun.
  • iforyou1109iforyou1109 Member Posts: 4
    edited March 2015
    s197gt said:

    ok ok ok. so you are saying that the TLX is a great value argument.

    except it isn't.

    Fusion Titanium AWD MSRP $30,290
    200S AWD MSRP $29,025
    Legacy Limited 3.6R MSRP $29,595

    considering you can get the fusion at invoice and the 200S below invoice those are the real values. with 0% offers from ford and chrylser you are saving $4-5K over an acura whose only unique offerings are 4-wheel steering, LED headlights, and presumably a slightly nicer dealership experience.

    i am sure you might say that the TLX doesn't compete with any of those cars and first, i'd disagree, and second i'd argue it doesn't really compete with BMW, Cadillac, or Lexus.

    acura is to honda what lincoln is to ford. just the next trim level up from the parent company; hardly viewed as a distinct manufacturer and not seriously considered by most luxury vehicle consumers. the mere fact you have to make the value argument proves it isn't a true luxury manufacturer. the koreans understand that...

    that is to say, someone who is looking at bmw, cadillac, or lexus probably never even considers an acura. conversely, someone looking at the acura might consider a bmw, MB, lexus, infiniti, lesux, etc...

    if they are looking specifically for AWD midsize sedans they probably will also consider the fusion, 200S/C, and legacy. most likely they are just honda fanboys looking for the next trim level up.

    Hmm those aren't exactly in the TLX class now, are they? Besides, no, I'm not saying the TLX is a great value against regular family sedans. If you look at this your way, then the Lexus ES or Audi A4 are way overpriced then? Yes, Audi and Lexus are more "prestigious" than the Acura brand, I agree. But they are also a few thousand dollars more expensive when similarly equipped. It's not like you are gaining anything for the same price. You get more of the prestigious factor, but you also pay more $$.

    Also, I already mentioned the Honda Accord when you were talking about the Passat. I already mentioned that for $33.5k, you get a fully loaded Accord with adaptive cruise control, full LED lights, etc that would also smokey the Fusion, 200S, Passat V6, or Legacy that you mentioned.

    The thing is, while Honda and Ford are looking to sell 300-400k Accords and Fusions annually, Acura is looking at selling about 40k TLXs. Don't you think that's a pretty big difference in terms of volume? Sure, the TLX is no BMW or Lexus or Mercedes, but certainly it's a lot more rare than a bread and butter Accord. That's why if you compare the value proposition, a car like the TLX would always lose out to the Accord.






  • benjaminhbenjaminh Member Posts: 6,096
    edited March 2015
    My wife has a 2013 Accord EXL, and it's a very nice car in every way. But here's a video road test of the TLX base model, and it looks substantially different inside and out. And the changes are more than skin deep, since the TLX has a slightly different engine, a completely different transmission, upgraded structure underneath, upgraded brakes, wheels, tires, etc. etc. Imho it's a nice entry-level luxury car starting at c. $31.5 msrp. The tester here is wrong about a couple of small things, because the "aluminum" and "wood" trim are fake, but I think the interior looks pretty nice. As the tester hits the gas on the drive at 8:40 it sounds nice.


    2018 Acura TLX 2.4 Tech 4WS (mine), 2018 Honda CR-V EX AWD (wife's)
  • benjaminhbenjaminh Member Posts: 6,096
    Sales of the TLX in Feb. of 2015 compared to its competitors:

    3/4series 8,748

    Clcass 7,072

    ES 4,192

    Q50 3,649

    TLX 3,419

    IS 3,383

    ATS 2,028

    MKZ 1,834

    A4 1,743
    2018 Acura TLX 2.4 Tech 4WS (mine), 2018 Honda CR-V EX AWD (wife's)
  • graphicguygraphicguy Edmunds Poster EmeritusMember Posts: 13,599
    benjaminh said:

    My wife has a 2013 Accord EXL, and it's a very nice car in every way. But here's a video road test of the TLX base model, and it looks substantially different inside and out. And the changes are more than skin deep, since the TLX has a slightly different engine, a completely different transmission, upgraded structure underneath, upgraded brakes, wheels, tires, etc. etc. Imho it's a nice entry-level luxury car starting at c. $31.5 msrp. The tester here is wrong about a couple of small things, because the "aluminum" and "wood" trim are fake, but I think the interior looks pretty nice. As the tester hits the gas on the drive at 8:40 it sounds nice.


    Now THAT'S a beautiful car.

    Are some of you really trying to compare a Chrysler 200 or Ford Fusion to a TLX?

    Clearly you haven't driven both.
    2022 Honda Accord Hybrid Touring
  • benjaminhbenjaminh Member Posts: 6,096
    The TLX has been nominated by Wards Automotive for "Best Interior":

    http://wardsauto.com/wards-10-best-interiors/2015-wards-10-best-interiors-nominee-acura-tlx#slide-0-field_images-1238621

    "2015 Ward's 10 Best Interiors Nominee: Acura TLX

    TLX fit-and-finish excellent."
    2018 Acura TLX 2.4 Tech 4WS (mine), 2018 Honda CR-V EX AWD (wife's)
  • graphicguygraphicguy Edmunds Poster EmeritusMember Posts: 13,599
    benjaminh said:

    The TLX has been nominated by Wards Automotive for "Best Interior":

    http://wardsauto.com/wards-10-best-interiors/2015-wards-10-best-interiors-nominee-acura-tlx#slide-0-field_images-1238621

    "2015 Ward's 10 Best Interiors Nominee: Acura TLX

    TLX fit-and-finish excellent."

    Acura always did put their cars together well (I put Chrysler on the far other end of that scale). I always felt that my previous TL was overbuilt, engineered well.

    I've only been in the TLX a couple of times for a test drive, but it's no different. They're good cars, made well, with good materials, fit and finish.

    2022 Honda Accord Hybrid Touring
  • mrvtecskimrvtecski Member Posts: 46
    edited March 2015
    I have driven a new 2.4 TLX, and it runs circles performance wise around my 2004 TSX, but as other Acura owners have mentioned, I am unsure what to get next- maybe a new GTI if they prove reliable. The new ILX finally has the TLX drivetrain, but it will always be an overpriced Civic to me. I covet the made in Japan, double wishbone suspension, bulletproof reliability, and 4 door Prelude feel the 1st gen TSX has. Yeah I had a 98 Prelude before and I regret selling it all the time!
  • benjaminhbenjaminh Member Posts: 6,096
    edited March 2015
    Having owned VWs, I can honestly say never again. And I'm not the only one. Look at how many people name VW in this Truth About Cars Article about Brands You'd Never Buy Again:

    http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2015/03/question-day-automaker-will-never-buy/

    But somewhat like you, I guess, I find the GTI somewhat compelling in spite of myself. But when I learned that the "engine sounds" in the GTI are mostly synthetic it helped end what little interest I had in it. VW has apparently for several years installed a "Soundaktor" to pump fake engine sounds into the car. As far as I know, Acura engine sounds are real.
    2018 Acura TLX 2.4 Tech 4WS (mine), 2018 Honda CR-V EX AWD (wife's)
  • iforyou1109iforyou1109 Member Posts: 4
    benjaminh said:

    Having owned VWs, I can honestly say never again. And I'm not the only one. Look at how many people name VW in this Truth About Cars Article about Brands You'd Never Buy Again:

    http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2015/03/question-day-automaker-will-never-buy/

    But somewhat like you, I guess, I find the GTI somewhat compelling in spite of myself. But when I learned that the "engine sounds" in the GTI are mostly synthetic it helped end what little interest I had in it. VW has apparently for several years installed a "Soundaktor" to pump fake engine sounds into the car. As far as I know, Acura engine sounds are real.

    It does seem like pumping fake engine sounds into the car MIGHT be the norm in the future. The BMW M3 and M5 are doing the same thing too.......not saying that's a good or bad thing....but it's possible that we might find such feature in more and more cars.
  • jlh3jlh3 Member Posts: 14
    Just to make a comment on the "fake engine sound" thing. This is done in different ways. The Soundaktor VW uses as far as I know is like a passive amplifier. The sound was always their, the device just amplifies and cancels out certain parts of it so you hear only what they want...passively, not electronic. The BMW is actually sending the engine sounds through the stereo system. The issue with this is what are you really hearing? Is it the true engine sound that has been miced or is it really a processed pre recording.
Sign In or Register to comment.