15 horse power less, what gives ?
06-13-2014, 09:41 AM
#201
Nah, it didn't hurt the new MDX, people are not looking for highest HP, they are looking for best combination of mpg's and performance. The new TLX will sell in big numbers to the masses. While the extreme enthusiast may be disappointed, they make up a very small percentage of sales.
06-13-2014, 11:11 PM
#203
06-13-2014, 11:21 PM
#204
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Raleigh, NC - USA
Age: 82
Posts: 7,674
Received 2,599 Likes
on
1,581 Posts
Possibly that peoples requirements are different when buying an SUV than a sport sedan. I know my Expedition EL & 435M-Sport, although at almost the same price point, have just about no requirements that match but both are very suited to what I bought them for.
Last edited by BEAR-AvHistory; 06-13-2014 at 11:25 PM.
06-14-2014, 12:43 AM
#205
Nah, it didn't hurt the new MDX, people are not looking for highest HP, they are looking for best combination of mpg's and performance. The new TLX will sell in big numbers to the masses. While the extreme enthusiast may be disappointed, they make up a very small percentage of sales.
The Kia Optima will sell more than the TLX.
06-14-2014, 12:58 AM
#206
The Kia Optima will sell more than the TLX.
Cadillac ATS
Infiniti Q50
BMW 3-series
Audi A4
Cars that sell far more than the Kia Optima (oh noes!) :
Honda Accord
Toyota Camry
Nissan Altima
Toyota Corolla (how COULD you, Kia!)
06-14-2014, 08:42 AM
#207
Suzuka Master
Neither does Acura. They're targeting around 45,000 per year.
Other cars the Kia Optima sells more than :
Cadillac ATS
Infiniti Q50
BMW 3-series
Audi A4
Cars that sell far more than the Kia Optima (oh noes!) :
Honda Accord
Toyota Camry
Nissan Altima
Toyota Corolla (how COULD you, Kia!)
Other cars the Kia Optima sells more than :
Cadillac ATS
Infiniti Q50
BMW 3-series
Audi A4
Cars that sell far more than the Kia Optima (oh noes!) :
Honda Accord
Toyota Camry
Nissan Altima
Toyota Corolla (how COULD you, Kia!)
06-14-2014, 03:32 PM
#208
Hard to tell what the value of the TLX is considering no one has really seen or driven the car or even know what the price is. Yes the Accord is cheaper so if lower cost means better value than the Civic is better value still. If they price this car like they tried with the RLX than, as always, the market will determine its value. The only question left is whether that is worth it to a buyer. If so it will sell, if not it won't.
It looks like an upgrade from the TSX, at least on paper. For TL owners there is probably not much that is going to convince someone to sell their late model TL and buy this, but I don't see it as a downgrade. It is smaller on the outside but not on the inside where it counts, the smaller exterior is a plus for me. It is lighter as a result, that is also a benefit. The 6MT is only important to a small minority of buyers and the new transmissions may be enough to offset some of them. The HP number may be down but the performance is up and so is the MPG. Those are both improvements and they will certainly market that. But for owners of a late model TL probably not worth the financial hit to upgrade. But when their TL reaches end of life for them, the TLX will be a nice option if the price it right.
It looks like an upgrade from the TSX, at least on paper. For TL owners there is probably not much that is going to convince someone to sell their late model TL and buy this, but I don't see it as a downgrade. It is smaller on the outside but not on the inside where it counts, the smaller exterior is a plus for me. It is lighter as a result, that is also a benefit. The 6MT is only important to a small minority of buyers and the new transmissions may be enough to offset some of them. The HP number may be down but the performance is up and so is the MPG. Those are both improvements and they will certainly market that. But for owners of a late model TL probably not worth the financial hit to upgrade. But when their TL reaches end of life for them, the TLX will be a nice option if the price it right.
07-16-2014, 08:48 PM
#209
Nah, it didn't hurt the new MDX, people are not looking for highest HP, they are looking for best combination of mpg's and performance. The new TLX will sell in big numbers to the masses. While the extreme enthusiast may be disappointed, they make up a very small percentage of sales.
As far as the MDX, we sold our MDX Advance and bought an Infiniti QX56 when the new MDX was released because it wasn't big enough. So not everyone is looking for the combo of performance/mpg, BUT Acura does a great job of finding a solid middle ground.
I'm still holding out hope that Acura decides to make a proper Type S for the TL and go after actual performance cars.
07-16-2014, 09:04 PM
#210
3rd gen TL'er here.
we've been tearing down the J-series engines and found out quite a bit of info!!
this might explain why they are always ay 290-300 crank HP
Cliffs:
Honda builds the J-series engine solely for MPG's, ie: green image.
we've been tearing down the J-series engines and found out quite a bit of info!!
IMO, yes. But maybe not.....
After having ran both the j35a8 and the j37a1 heads on the same engine (TWICE!), I've realized that the j35a8 heads are much more efficient at breathing at higher engine speeds. Though I never ran stock cams throughout all of this, and on one engine I was running boost, I could definitely tell the tumble ports (j37a1) drop power up top using the j35a8 TLS cams.
But here's something to think about, back in 2005 (nearly ten years ago) the RL was skimming the 300hp mark with the j35a8. Since then, Honda has increased the displacement from 3.5 to 3.7 (that was said to add 20hp alone!), improved cylinder head design (said to have made 7hp alone!), made intake and exhaust improvements (made ANOTHER 7hp!), added intake and exhaust VTEC, added low friction rings and machining, increased compression 2/10's of a point (11.0:1 to 11.2 :1) and even after all these improvement to the "flagship" model powerplant, they still ONLY managed to squeeze another 15hp (290hp to 305hp) since then!!!??? This is clearly purposeful detuning. But what for?
I'm not a engineer or anything but this could only mean one thing: Build the engines to make the same power, more efficiently and gain leverage on both reliability and emissions. If the engine produces the same horsepower but with less effort and without adding more fuel or revving the engine up higher, well then that's a good thing. That's also a "Green" move on Hondas behalf.
After having ran both the j35a8 and the j37a1 heads on the same engine (TWICE!), I've realized that the j35a8 heads are much more efficient at breathing at higher engine speeds. Though I never ran stock cams throughout all of this, and on one engine I was running boost, I could definitely tell the tumble ports (j37a1) drop power up top using the j35a8 TLS cams.
But here's something to think about, back in 2005 (nearly ten years ago) the RL was skimming the 300hp mark with the j35a8. Since then, Honda has increased the displacement from 3.5 to 3.7 (that was said to add 20hp alone!), improved cylinder head design (said to have made 7hp alone!), made intake and exhaust improvements (made ANOTHER 7hp!), added intake and exhaust VTEC, added low friction rings and machining, increased compression 2/10's of a point (11.0:1 to 11.2 :1) and even after all these improvement to the "flagship" model powerplant, they still ONLY managed to squeeze another 15hp (290hp to 305hp) since then!!!??? This is clearly purposeful detuning. But what for?
I'm not a engineer or anything but this could only mean one thing: Build the engines to make the same power, more efficiently and gain leverage on both reliability and emissions. If the engine produces the same horsepower but with less effort and without adding more fuel or revving the engine up higher, well then that's a good thing. That's also a "Green" move on Hondas behalf.
Most likely for economy and emissions, while adding a bit of power to keep up with others and meet customer expectations as well, not to mention cars seem to keep getting fatter these days, so more weight to push around, and you don't want to lose performance because of that. Reliability most likely increased as well, but this is probably more of a byproduct than a goal. It's not like Honda engines suffered from short life spans or reliability issues. Fuel economy and the ever changing emissions regulations usually rule priority in family sedans these days. They push a little more performance out of their sport models, but IMO Honda is still conservative here, with the exception of the NSX and (if released) the turbo Si in Europe (next year?).
this might explain why they are always ay 290-300 crank HP
Cliffs:
Honda builds the J-series engine solely for MPG's, ie: green image.
The following users liked this post:
Acura_Dude (07-17-2014)
07-17-2014, 09:52 AM
#211
Betting the 2.4 will hit 0-60 in around 6.0 secs (or somewhere between a 320i-328i or an A4). Mainly because of the new trans.
The 3.5 will probably shave nearly a second off that, again because of the trans and lighter weight. Putting it near an IS350 or giving up a few ticks to a 335i.
The big deal though is the MPG. It will be a pretty big jump for the TLX vs the TL.
Pricing is competitive....pretty car, at least in the pics. Got an invitation for a "grand unveiling" party at my local Acura dealer in a few weeks. Interested to see and drive it in person.
The 3.5 will probably shave nearly a second off that, again because of the trans and lighter weight. Putting it near an IS350 or giving up a few ticks to a 335i.
The big deal though is the MPG. It will be a pretty big jump for the TLX vs the TL.
Pricing is competitive....pretty car, at least in the pics. Got an invitation for a "grand unveiling" party at my local Acura dealer in a few weeks. Interested to see and drive it in person.
08-14-2014, 06:36 PM
#214
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Raleigh, NC - USA
Age: 82
Posts: 7,674
Received 2,599 Likes
on
1,581 Posts
All mechanical things being equal you would need to hack the ECU. Tuners have already added power to the new M3/4 with ECU piggy backs. Up to 80WHP more depending on fuel.
08-16-2014, 10:59 AM
#216
Three Wheelin'
Pretty easy to do on a turbo car. Just up a few psi and away you go. The 335i has always been underrated by BMW too, most likely for fear of cannibalizing sales of other models, such as the far more expensive and not a whole lot more powerful M3. The 300hp 335i engine was always more like 330hp out of the box. Of course if people knew that then why pay $30k more for an M3? The Audi S4's 333hp is another underrated engine from factory - it has more than that. I think some manufacturers also avoid some regulations or taxes by staying below certain power ratings? Could be mistaken there, forgot where I heard that from.
08-21-2014, 07:45 PM
#217
Personally I don't care if automatic transmission yields better performance. I don't race my car, but I do care about the driving experience. I test drove 2014 4G TL with AT which has a bigger engine and more horse power than my 3G 6MT, but I was not really all that excited about it. To me, a life long MT cars owner, AT feels like I'm a witness or bystander to the driving experience. Manual transmission gives much better feedback as to what the engine and the car is doing at any given time. So yes I'm perfectly fine with worse 0-60 times because the feeling of truly "operating the machinery" makes up for it. The 260HP my 3G has, is right at the point where my car can get away from me if I'm not careful, so I fell that it's enough power for this car and me.
And to the people putting down Mazda, my wife just got a 2015 Mazda 6 Touring with 6sp MT and it's a really fine car. She has plenty of technology in it (backup camera, blind spot monitoring, bluetooth and USB music playback etc), very nice handling, good looks, good performance, 19" wheels standard AND she gets real life 38mpg with 90% highway driving (with cheap regular gas at that). Her Mazda 6 is as roomy as my 06 TL and was $10k cheaper when new. If Mazda came up with 250HP turbo option for about $28k I would buy it over the TLX in a heartbeat.
And to the people putting down Mazda, my wife just got a 2015 Mazda 6 Touring with 6sp MT and it's a really fine car. She has plenty of technology in it (backup camera, blind spot monitoring, bluetooth and USB music playback etc), very nice handling, good looks, good performance, 19" wheels standard AND she gets real life 38mpg with 90% highway driving (with cheap regular gas at that). Her Mazda 6 is as roomy as my 06 TL and was $10k cheaper when new. If Mazda came up with 250HP turbo option for about $28k I would buy it over the TLX in a heartbeat.
Last edited by Thuneau; 08-21-2014 at 07:47 PM.
08-21-2014, 08:05 PM
#218
34mpg on the freeway?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Acura604
2G RDX Audio, Bluetooth, Electronics & Navigation
20
08-05-2017 12:55 AM
