Acura FAILS Again with the TSX!

[GTaudiophile]

I mean, Honda/Acura, the people who gave us the NSX, have all the knowledge and resources to give the world the ultimate car: good looking, sporty, fun, reliable, and efficient!

But instead we get crap like the new 2009 TSX.

Did they make it good looking? NO!
Did they give it the turbo 4 from the RDX? NO!
Did they give it RWD? NO!
Did they give it SH-AWD? NO!


What a total snooze job.

Even Edmunds agrees: Acura builds a better TSX for 2009, but it forgets to add a couple must-have ingredients (like chic styling, competitive power and raw desirability) to entice the young, sophisticated buyers it seeks.

Acura could have scored a home run with a cool looking, turbo-4 powered, 6-speed MT, SH-AWD, smallish luxury sedan!

Oh well.

The Acura dealer is probably the last place I would go on a new car hunt.

 

[Aharami]

Did they give it the turbo 4 from the RSX? NO!

I think you mean RDX

yea the car's pretty fugly

 

[A5]

Yeah - they could have made something great, but instead they settled for something that's good enough...the problem is that it really isn't good enough for the money they want. Sure it has a lot of toys, but I want more than 201 HP in a $30K car.

 

[mwmorph]

Honda/Acura's designs have not been attractive as of late.
I liked the RSX, TL-S otherwise,
The RDX was pretty ugly the new TSX is ugly, the Accord looks bloated, the 2009 RL is not attractive, the future Pilot looks like a rectangular spaceship, the CRV has a face only it's mother can love, the Civic Sedan reminds me of a VW Beetle stretched out...

Honda, Toyota, Acura, Lincoln, Mercury, Scion, Nissan's GTR & Maxima, Bangle 5,7,1 & 3 series sedans, off the top of my head seem to be making cars ugly just for the sake of being different and thus, ugly.

 

[HannibalX]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
I mean, Honda/Acura, the people who gave us the NSX, have all the knowledge and resources to give the world the ultimate car: good looking, sporty, fun, reliable, and efficient!

But instead we get crap like the new 2009 TSX.

Did they make it good looking? NO!
Did they give it the turbo 4 from the RSX? NO!
Did they give it RWD? NO!
Did they give it SH-AWD? NO!


What a total snooze job.

Even Edmunds agrees: Acura builds a better TSX for 2009, but it forgets to add a couple must-have ingredients (like chic styling, competitive power and raw desirability) to entice the young, sophisticated buyers it seeks.

Acura could have scored a home run with a cool looking, turbo-4 powered, 6-speed MT, SH-AWD, smallish luxury sedan!

Oh well.

The Acura dealer is probably the last place I would go on a new car hunt.

It sounds like you should take a marketing class. You are obviously not who this car is marketed to.

The TSX is a family car. It always has been (Euro Spec Accord). It only gets an NA I4 because it's supposed to be economical.

The TSX isn't marketed at the boy racer. If you want a boy racer Honda they sell a car for you, it's called the Civic Si.

 

[andylawcc]

previous gen Euro Accord > previous gen US TSX > this > current Accord > shit > previous Accord.

 

[OS]

the base model is actually down on power compared to last year, but there is a yet to be announced optional motor.
but yeah, as it stands it does not look promising, i would not buy one.

 

[ayabe]

That's the problem, the current TSX is a nice car, but it's got no balls whatsoever. You can call it sporty but it really isn't in that price category, if they want to drop the price to $24K then fine but that's not what we're looking at.

 

[Capt Caveman]

If I was in the market for a new vehicle, the MDX would be on my list.

 

[Riverhound777]

Reminds me of a Saturn

 

[GoatMonkey]

The new TSX sure isn't anything special so far. That could change if they do actually get around to putting a variation of the RDX engine in there. An extra 80 or 100hp would really improve that styling.

At one point one of the head guys at Acura said that every car in the lineup would have an option for a 300 or more hp engine. So far he's a liar. But that could change.

Maybe... maybe, the 2009 TL will be better.

 

[A5]

Originally posted by: Pale Rider

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
I mean, Honda/Acura, the people who gave us the NSX, have all the knowledge and resources to give the world the ultimate car: good looking, sporty, fun, reliable, and efficient!

But instead we get crap like the new 2009 TSX.

Did they make it good looking? NO!
Did they give it the turbo 4 from the RSX? NO!
Did they give it RWD? NO!
Did they give it SH-AWD? NO!


What a total snooze job.

Even Edmunds agrees: Acura builds a better TSX for 2009, but it forgets to add a couple must-have ingredients (like chic styling, competitive power and raw desirability) to entice the young, sophisticated buyers it seeks.

Acura could have scored a home run with a cool looking, turbo-4 powered, 6-speed MT, SH-AWD, smallish luxury sedan!

Oh well.

The Acura dealer is probably the last place I would go on a new car hunt.

It sounds like you should take a marketing class. You are obviously not who this car is marketed to.

The TSX is a family car. It always has been (Euro Spec Accord). It only gets an NA I4 because it's supposed to be economical.

The TSX isn't marketed at the boy racer. If you want a boy racer Honda they sell a car for you, it's called the Civic Si.

But it's marketed here as a luxury sport sedan...

 

[amdhunter]

Originally posted by: GoatMonkey
The new TSX sure isn't anything special so far. That could change if they do actually get around to putting a variation of the RDX engine in there. An extra 80 or 100hp would really improve that styling.

At one point one of the head guys at Acura said that every car in the lineup would have an option for a 300 or more hp engine. So far he's a liar. But that could change.

Maybe... maybe, the 2009 TL will be better.

I think that Acura would lose sales on the RL if they put too much goodiness into the new TSX. I wouldn't give the RL a 2nd look if the TSX came with a turbo'd engine. :drool:

By the way, I kind of like the styling. /hides

 

[zoiks]

Originally posted by: amdhunter

Originally posted by: GoatMonkey
The new TSX sure isn't anything special so far. That could change if they do actually get around to putting a variation of the RDX engine in there. An extra 80 or 100hp would really improve that styling.

At one point one of the head guys at Acura said that every car in the lineup would have an option for a 300 or more hp engine. So far he's a liar. But that could change.

Maybe... maybe, the 2009 TL will be better.

I think that Acura would lose sales on the RL if they put too much goodiness into the new TSX. I wouldn't give the RL a 2nd look if the TSX came with a turbo'd engine. :drool:

By the way, I kind of like the styling. /hides

I doubt too many people give the RL a second look these days.

 

[ayabe]

Yeah seriously, the RL is a fat turd.

 

[geokilla]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
I mean, Honda/Acura, the people who gave us the NSX, have all the knowledge and resources to give the world the ultimate car: good looking, sporty, fun, reliable, and efficient!

But instead we get crap like the new 2009 TSX.

Did they make it good looking? NO!
Did they give it the turbo 4 from the RDX? NO!
Did they give it RWD? NO!
Did they give it SH-AWD? NO!


What a total snooze job.

Even Edmunds agrees: Acura builds a better TSX for 2009, but it forgets to add a couple must-have ingredients (like chic styling, competitive power and raw desirability) to entice the young, sophisticated buyers it seeks.

Acura could have scored a home run with a cool looking, turbo-4 powered, 6-speed MT, SH-AWD, smallish luxury sedan!

Oh well.

The Acura dealer is probably the last place I would go on a new car hunt.

We all knew Acura won't give it SH-AWD or RWD since it'll cost them too much. It just isn't reasonable to have the TSX to be the only RWD car in production while the rest of the Acura /Honda lineup uses FWD, excluding the S2000 and future NSX.

As for the RDX engine, they can't use that either otherwise the performance would be better than the TL, and probably the TL Type S. The turbo 4 was probably designed for SUV and Crossover use only. Plus, Honda focuses on high revving engines, which I like very much even though I've never driven one before. I would prefer the high revs over a turbo any day. Let's hope they'll add the Turbo 4 in as an option when the TSX gets a facelift.

What the hell did they do with the Acura grill? The old one looks way better than their new grill. I have nothing to say about the grill except for "OMG USE YOUR OLD GRILLS ACURA!"

 

[thomsbrain]

It's probably incrementally better than the outgoing model, but I agree that they missed more than one boat here. Lots of potential wasted, and I think it would be really hard to justify buying one when there are other options with so much more performance to offer.

 

[Xyclone]

Not digging the front end. It reminds me of a Saturn Ion for some reason, and that's NOT a good thing. I agree that Acura wasted potential on this redesign. The SH-AWD system and a turbo can turn a run-of-the-mill FWD honda into an AWD semi-sports car.

 

[foghorn67]

/shakes fist in the air.

 

[jtvang125]

This is exactly why acura is still behind lexus and infiniti.

 

[Corporate Thug]

*yawn*

 

[GoatMonkey]

Originally posted by: geokilla

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
I mean, Honda/Acura, the people who gave us the NSX, have all the knowledge and resources to give the world the ultimate car: good looking, sporty, fun, reliable, and efficient!

But instead we get crap like the new 2009 TSX.

Did they make it good looking? NO!
Did they give it the turbo 4 from the RDX? NO!
Did they give it RWD? NO!
Did they give it SH-AWD? NO!


What a total snooze job.

Even Edmunds agrees: Acura builds a better TSX for 2009, but it forgets to add a couple must-have ingredients (like chic styling, competitive power and raw desirability) to entice the young, sophisticated buyers it seeks.

Acura could have scored a home run with a cool looking, turbo-4 powered, 6-speed MT, SH-AWD, smallish luxury sedan!

Oh well.

The Acura dealer is probably the last place I would go on a new car hunt.

We all knew Acura won't give it SH-AWD or RWD since it'll cost them too much. It just isn't reasonable to have the TSX to be the only RWD car in production while the rest of the Acura /Honda lineup uses FWD, excluding the S2000 and future NSX.

As for the RDX engine, they can't use that either otherwise the performance would be better than the TL, and probably the TL Type S. The turbo 4 was probably designed for SUV and Crossover use only. Plus, Honda focuses on high revving engines, which I like very much even though I've never driven one before. I would prefer the high revs over a turbo any day. Let's hope they'll add the Turbo 4 in as an option when the TSX gets a facelift.

What the hell did they do with the Acura grill? The old one looks way better than their new grill. I have nothing to say about the grill except for "OMG USE YOUR OLD GRILLS ACURA!"

This is true. If they do release a TSX with a RDX engine it would have to be after the new more powerful TL goes on sale. The quote I saw did say something like "next generation", not necessarily the first version of the next generation. So it could be that the TSX will get a real engine in 2010.

 

[helpme]

Good thing I bought my 2006 when I did instead of waiting for hopes of a powerful 2009.

The TSX is still fun on the track, but it's heavy and of course lacks power. It is a very strong contender in the Speed Touring car challenge though.

 

[zanejohnson]

200hp, WTF.


how much is the MSRP??


ridiculous when for 28k you can have a 08 Accord Coupe V6 making 268hp....

 

[Pandaren]

The TSX fails because it is based on the Euro Accord, a vehicle clearly designed to be a well-balanced family sedan, not a performance vehicle.

Acura needs some ground-up design with a specific goal in mind. In the meantime, people who want a sporty Honda should buy a Civic Si sedan.