Originally posted by: Imported
Just came back from test driving the TSX.. then I test drove the Mazda 6..
Gimme the Mazda 6 with the V6 in it please!
Good conclusion. That's what the Euro tester's felt too. Mazda 6 they said was a better buy unless you wanted the slightly better interior of TSX.
Secondly to the posts about Torque/HP, understand the fact that while Honda makes it's torque curves flat and available thru the powerband (and that is good), they just don't bloody make enough torque. :disgust: What pushes you in your seat is the torque not just plain HP. Acceleration is ofcourse more complicated deduction since it takes gear ratios, engine rpm into consideration. And that's why Honda typically has higher rpm engines.
A higher torque like than in a BMW engine or for that matter a better 4-banger like the VW 1.8 Turbo makes the engine feel so much "gruntier" & meatier than a typically torque neutered Honda 4-banger. And also to the poster who mentioned about the S2000 engine, do you realize that inspite of the fact that it makes 240hp, if you try shifting it like a normal car, it's 0-60 goes more like 11 to 15 seconds... heck a Geo metro can beat it. To achieve the 5.x sec 0-60 it has to be drive in 8000-9000rpm all the time and that if you realize can be quite annoying and irritating... This however would never happen with a BMW or a good torquey 4 banger like the VW 1.8T. I hope you understand the difference.
Originally posted by: LittleWolf
Originally posted by: Imported
Just came back from test driving the TSX.. then I test drove the Mazda 6..
Gimme the Mazda 6 with the V6 in it please!
Good conclusion. That's what the Euro tester's felt too. Mazda 6 they said was a better buy unless you wanted the slightly better interior of TSX.
Secondly to the posts about Torque/HP, understand the fact that while Honda makes it's torque curves flat and available thru the powerband (and that is good), they just don't bloody make enough torque. :disgust: What pushes you in your seat is the torque not just plain HP. Acceleration is ofcourse more complicated deduction since it takes gear ratios, engine rpm into consideration. And that's why Honda typically has higher rpm engines.
A higher torque like than in a BMW engine or for that matter a better 4-banger like the VW 1.8 Turbo makes the engine feel so much "gruntier" & meatier than a typically torque neutered Honda 4-banger. And also to the poster who mentioned about the S2000 engine, do you realize that inspite of the fact that it makes 240hp, if you try shifting it like a normal car, it's 0-60 goes more like 11 to 15 seconds... heck a Geo metro can beat it. To achieve the 5.x sec 0-60 it has to be drive in 8000-9000rpm all the time and that if you realize can be quite annoying and irritating... This however would never happen with a BMW or a good torquey 4 banger like the VW 1.8T. I hope you understand the difference.
I would call the 1.8T an utter failure. That is all it is- a failure. A turbocharged 1.8L four banger that weak-- pleaseee...
and FYI, last time I checked I don't really care about 0-60 getting to and from work. That's for the race track. I find your logic hard to believe- the S2k is a beautiful car, lacking some TQ, but still quick all around, even in the lower RPMS.
Originally posted by: rubenswm
Originally posted by: LittleWolf
Originally posted by: Imported
Just came back from test driving the TSX.. then I test drove the Mazda 6..
Gimme the Mazda 6 with the V6 in it please!
Good conclusion. That's what the Euro tester's felt too. Mazda 6 they said was a better buy unless you wanted the slightly better interior of TSX.
Secondly to the posts about Torque/HP, understand the fact that while Honda makes it's torque curves flat and available thru the powerband (and that is good), they just don't bloody make enough torque. :disgust: What pushes you in your seat is the torque not just plain HP. Acceleration is ofcourse more complicated deduction since it takes gear ratios, engine rpm into consideration. And that's why Honda typically has higher rpm engines.
A higher torque like than in a BMW engine or for that matter a better 4-banger like the VW 1.8 Turbo makes the engine feel so much "gruntier" & meatier than a typically torque neutered Honda 4-banger. And also to the poster who mentioned about the S2000 engine, do you realize that inspite of the fact that it makes 240hp, if you try shifting it like a normal car, it's 0-60 goes more like 11 to 15 seconds... heck a Geo metro can beat it. To achieve the 5.x sec 0-60 it has to be drive in 8000-9000rpm all the time and that if you realize can be quite annoying and irritating... This however would never happen with a BMW or a good torquey 4 banger like the VW 1.8T. I hope you understand the difference.
I would call the 1.8T an utter failure. That is all it is- a failure. A turbocharged 1.8L four banger that weak-- pleaseee...
and FYI, last time I checked I don't really care about 0-60 getting to and from work. That's for the race track. I find your logic hard to believe- the S2k is a beautiful car, lacking some TQ, but still quick all around, even in the lower RPMS.
You don't care about 0-60? I was driving my dad's Taurus, with my parents in it, to do an apartment lease application for next semester... I was pretty damn scared when I put the pedal to the metal while merging and nothing happened!!!
May I ask what makes you think that the 1.8T is a utter failure? I am starting to think you don't know anything about engines. If you bother to read a bit about the 1.8T engine you would realize that it is one of the best 4-bangers in the world currently. It has consistently won awards from Wards (hope u know that) and most other engineering/auto publications... It's one of the text-book motor application for low-spool/pressure turbo and highly tunable with great reliable grunt and efficiency for it's displacement. The S2K is a nice car, but other that a good chassis (in part due to use of light weight 4-banger) and an annoying in daily-life highly strung 4-banger (very much non-tunable) doesn't have much. Well let's say that the sales of it speak for themselves.
OS
Lifer
- Oct 11, 1999
- 15,581
- 1
- 76
Well besides the fact that the cars that motor is in is about as fast as a corolla?
Oh yeah I'm sure you've heard of that coil pack fiasco. That's kind of too bad how half a million of those motors are bad.
The s2k motor would bitch slap your 1.8t with one cylinder tied behind it's back.
Originally posted by: WinkOsmosis
Originally posted by: rubenswm
Originally posted by: LittleWolf
Originally posted by: Imported
Just came back from test driving the TSX.. then I test drove the Mazda 6..
Gimme the Mazda 6 with the V6 in it please!
Good conclusion. That's what the Euro tester's felt too. Mazda 6 they said was a better buy unless you wanted the slightly better interior of TSX.
Secondly to the posts about Torque/HP, understand the fact that while Honda makes it's torque curves flat and available thru the powerband (and that is good), they just don't bloody make enough torque. :disgust: What pushes you in your seat is the torque not just plain HP. Acceleration is ofcourse more complicated deduction since it takes gear ratios, engine rpm into consideration. And that's why Honda typically has higher rpm engines.
A higher torque like than in a BMW engine or for that matter a better 4-banger like the VW 1.8 Turbo makes the engine feel so much "gruntier" & meatier than a typically torque neutered Honda 4-banger. And also to the poster who mentioned about the S2000 engine, do you realize that inspite of the fact that it makes 240hp, if you try shifting it like a normal car, it's 0-60 goes more like 11 to 15 seconds... heck a Geo metro can beat it. To achieve the 5.x sec 0-60 it has to be drive in 8000-9000rpm all the time and that if you realize can be quite annoying and irritating... This however would never happen with a BMW or a good torquey 4 banger like the VW 1.8T. I hope you understand the difference.
I would call the 1.8T an utter failure. That is all it is- a failure. A turbocharged 1.8L four banger that weak-- pleaseee...
and FYI, last time I checked I don't really care about 0-60 getting to and from work. That's for the race track. I find your logic hard to believe- the S2k is a beautiful car, lacking some TQ, but still quick all around, even in the lower RPMS.
You don't care about 0-60? I was driving my dad's Taurus, with my parents in it, to do an apartment lease application for next semester... I was pretty damn scared when I put the pedal to the metal while merging and nothing happened!!!
I care about 0-60. I'm just saying nothing really says that you need your max power in the lower rpms to have a quick car.
Ok now I know you are talking thru ur ass and don't know squat about engines. when you start talking about coil pack and engine as same, I won't even bother answering you ...
This car is a BARGAIN at 27k, it has EVERYTHING standard except nav. Leather, moonroof, xenons, heated seats, very well tuned suspension, and nice 17" rims. You also have honda reliability and acura service, two things that I personally am very interested in, as I'm coming off a nightmare lease with my VW (horrible reliability, and even worse dealerships).
People who say "get a 3-series or G35 the it'll be just a bit more money" don't seem to realize that if you put all the options the TSX comes with into one of those cars, you'd have a 32-33k G35, and 35k 3-series, easy. Whereas you can expect this car to be leasing at or below $350 with almost no money out of pocket at signing, the G35 and 3-series go for mid 4s. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed the G35 when I drove it, and I'm always a fan of the 3-series, but with the disparate pricing of the cars, you really shouldn't be comparing them.
This car should be compared to the A4 1.8t FrontTrak, and it would have to be base, because they want stupid money for A4 leases....have to seperate it from the passat somehow. This means cloth, soft suspension, 15" rims. Or the Nissan Maxima. To me the choice is pretty simple there. The audi would be a stripper, which I could live with, but it would handle poorly.....not that it really matters, since I will never own another VAG product so long as I live unless its a lambo. The maxima.....they have completely ruined with this redesign, its hideous. Not to mention that my brothers 01 (or is it an 02?) with only 250hp has crazy torque steer, I can't imagine what its like with an extra 15hp. The other car I hear coming up a lot is the Mazda 6.....a tremendous car for what it is meant to fight against. I would reccomend it over a Jetta, Passat, Altima, Camry, or Accord any day of the week, and twice on sunday. However even in its nicest trim I feel it would be a stretch to call it luxurious (and yes, I have driven it). The engines (both of them), are a bit on the rough side, and the interior is nice, but can't compete with the more expensive sedans (and the point is.....it isn't supposed to). Its a king amongst the low 20k crowd, but once you creep up the 20s, its out of place. Anyway, now I'm going to just paste the post I made on the vwvortex now about how I felt about the TSX when I drove it. Here goes.....
People who say "get a 3-series or G35 the it'll be just a bit more money" don't seem to realize that if you put all the options the TSX comes with into one of those cars, you'd have a 32-33k G35, and 35k 3-series, easy. Whereas you can expect this car to be leasing at or below $350 with almost no money out of pocket at signing, the G35 and 3-series go for mid 4s. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed the G35 when I drove it, and I'm always a fan of the 3-series, but with the disparate pricing of the cars, you really shouldn't be comparing them.
This car should be compared to the A4 1.8t FrontTrak, and it would have to be base, because they want stupid money for A4 leases....have to seperate it from the passat somehow. This means cloth, soft suspension, 15" rims. Or the Nissan Maxima. To me the choice is pretty simple there. The audi would be a stripper, which I could live with, but it would handle poorly.....not that it really matters, since I will never own another VAG product so long as I live unless its a lambo
. The maxima.....they have completely ruined with this redesign, its hideous. Not to mention that my brothers 01 (or is it an 02?) with only 250hp has crazy torque steer, I can't imagine what its like with an extra 15hp. The other car I hear coming up a lot is the Mazda 6.....a tremendous car for what it is meant to fight against. I would reccomend it over a Jetta, Passat, Altima, Camry, or Accord any day of the week, and twice on sunday. However even in its nicest trim I feel it would be a stretch to call it luxurious (and yes, I have driven it). The engines (both of them), are a bit on the rough side, and the interior is nice, but can't compete with the more expensive sedans (and the point is.....it isn't supposed to). Its a king amongst the low 20k crowd, but once you creep up the 20s, its out of place. Anyway, now I'm going to just paste the post I made on the vwvortex now about how I felt about the TSX when I drove it. Here goes.....Originally posted by: LittleWolf
Good conclusion. That's what the Euro tester's felt too. Mazda 6 they said was a better buy unless you wanted the slightly better interior of TSX. Secondly to the posts about Torque/HP, understand the fact that while Honda makes it's torque curves flat and available thru the powerband (and that is good), they just don't bloody make enough torque. :disgust: What pushes you in your seat is the torque not just plain HP. Acceleration is ofcourse more complicated deduction since it takes gear ratios, engine rpm into consideration. And that's why Honda typically has higher rpm engines. A higher torque like than in a BMW engine or for that matter a better 4-banger like the VW 1.8 Turbo makes the engine feel so much "gruntier" & meatier than a typically torque neutered Honda 4-banger. And also to the poster who mentioned about the S2000 engine, do you realize that inspite of the fact that it makes 240hp, if you try shifting it like a normal car, it's 0-60 goes more like 11 to 15 seconds... heck a Geo metro can beat it. To achieve the 5.x sec 0-60 it has to be drive in 8000-9000rpm all the time and that if you realize can be quite annoying and irritating... This however would never happen with a BMW or a good torquey 4 banger like the VW 1.8T. I hope you understand the difference.Originally posted by: Imported Just came back from test driving the TSX.. then I test drove the Mazda 6.. Gimme the Mazda 6 with the V6 in it please!
Precisely, one of my friends has an Intergra GS-R and I was shocked when he took me for a ride in it. He really didn't get the hang of shifting at high RPMS, so basically the car offered the feel of a regular Civic. If you get inside a VW 1.8T you will understand very quickly what an excellent marriage of torque available at a low RPM + appropriate gear ratios will feel like. I also have a friend with a 200hp Eclipse that just doesn't feel anything like my Jetta VR6 at all.
The only reason to get a TSX is to get an Accord while escaping the incredibly hideous rear end design of the new Accord. One other thing, you can't even compare the TL and CL to cars like the 330i or A4 3.0, leave alone the TSX. Currently the Mazda 6 is the only Japanese sedan I would even thin about as my next car, but I still need to test drive it to see if it has the solid steering feel I am used to from VW (All the Toyotas and Hondas that I have driven have absolutely terrible steering feel - it feels like you're driving a car on stilts).
I sure as hell hope that when you're talking about your "great steering feeling", you're talking about a mk2 or mk3 (at most) golf/jetta
- Oct 9, 1999
- 72,636
- 47
- 91
Acura TSX = $26,490
Infiniti G35 6-speed manual w/Leather & Sport suspension & 17" wheels = $29,645
Unless you're a damn cheapskate bastard, I can't see anyone picking the bland TSX over the more powerful (the VQ35 r@pes that puny, gutless 2.0 4-banger), MUCH faster, better looking rear-wheel drive G35
Originally posted by: MJGunn
I sure as hell hope that when you're talking about your "great steering feeling", you're talking about a mk2 or mk3 (at most) golf/jetta
Firstly, you don't know which generation of Golf/Jetta I was talking about. Secondly, even the MKIV Golf/Jetta models have much better steering feel than any Toyota or Honda. I think the MKIV models went backwards with regard to steering feel but it is still miles ahead of those other cars I mentioned.
Very, very, very backwards, the car is as anonymous as any other sedan on the road now (trust me.....I own one, sad as that is). Also, no, I don't know what generation G/J you were talking about, which is why I said I hoped you weren't talking about the mk4 instead of launching into a tyrade about how stupid mk4 owners are who think their cars drive great just because its german
Originally posted by: MJGunn
Very, very, very backwards, the car is as anonymous as any other sedan on the road now (trust me.....I own one, sad as that is). Also, no, I don't know what generation G/J you were talking about, which is why I said I hoped you weren't talking about the mk4 instead of launching into a tyrade about how stupid mk4 owners are who think their cars drive great just because its german
C'mmon The Jetta is no way as anonymous as the hordes of Corrollas/Civics/Camcords....
Don't worry, the next Jetta (Gen V) will fix most of the driving lustre which is missing from the current gen. it is gonna be a much better "driver's" car. In addition to upping the interior lux, fit/finish (already the best in class) also's it gonna be a bit bigger than the current Jetta. I wouldn't be the least surprised if the next gen Jetta (out next year) will compete head-on with the TSX....
- Oct 9, 1999
- 72,636
- 47
- 91
Yup, it does remind me a bit of the Mazda 6. Even so, I'll gladly take my money to Infiniti for a G35 if I want a Japanese sedan with some class. And only 15,000 units a year?? That's about half as many Accords that Honda sells in a month. Looks like Acura is prepared for this thing to fail.
- Oct 9, 1999
- 72,636
- 47
- 91
Yeah, I'll take the real deal
http://www.caranddriver.com/xp/Caranddriver/previews/2003/april/0304_preview_tsx.xml?&page=1
Originally posted by: LittleWolf
C'mmon The Jetta is no way as anonymous as the hordes of Corrollas/Civics/Camcords....Originally posted by: MJGunnVery, very, very backwards, the car is as anonymous as any other sedan on the road now (trust me.....I own one, sad as that is). Also, no, I don't know what generation G/J you were talking about, which is why I said I hoped you weren't talking about the mk4 instead of launching into a tyrade about how stupid mk4 owners are who think their cars drive great just because its germanDon't worry, the next Jetta (Gen V) will fix most of the driving lustre which is missing from the current gen. it is gonna be a much better "driver's" car. In addition to upping the interior lux, fit/finish (already the best in class) also's it gonna be a bit bigger than the current Jetta. I wouldn't be the least surprised if the next gen Jetta (out next year) will compete head-on with the TSX....
Rumor has it that we will be seeing RWD or 4-Motion (much more likely).
MJGunn:
I realize that the MKIV is backwards compared to the MKII and MKIII both of which I have driven. But I needed a new car and the MK4 is what I ended up buying. I do find myself disappointed while taking fast curves (80-100 MPH) or really sharp on-ramps at high speed, but I have also driven Camrys, and Accords and there is no way that those cars can even think of keeping up with a Jetta/Golf even an MK4. Those cars literally feel like they are on stilts, they lose traction quite abruptly (due in part to the tires those cars come with), and they feel even more mushy/disconnected from the road than the Golf/Jetta. I could never drive a car that feels so disconnected from the road as those cars, but the MKIVs are not bad in that regard.
I too, hate how they've softened up the ride (badly) and how they've made the cars way too overweight. However to say that the Jetta has stooped to the levels of the average Japanese sedan is overstating it quite a bit.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter