winstrolvtec

That is a great question, one I wonder about as well. I don't think it's high 4's though, probably low 5's, 5 flat area at best. They shed 230+ lbs on SH models depending on equipment so that should squash the power loss, they added 3 more gears, likely improved brake torquing ability, better aerodynamics as well as improved friction and drivetrain losses, plus additional software capacity for "sport" driving mode, the old ones never really seemed to do much of anything compared to what competitors did or even normal driving mode, but helps when you actually have more than 5-6 gears to go along with that in the first place.

FWIW, if one looks at recent comparos of late, hp to weight is almost a dead figure and doesn't equate as well as years ago because of all of the gear play we have today and improved torque readiness as well as capacity in general.

Think they could easily get that .5 seconds off as well as the mpg improvements considering all of that. The MDX did something like that with only one added gear and maybe slightly improved brake torque ability I assume. With any manufacturer, if they wanted to be less mpg competitive they could have probably done even better in acceleration improvement even on this motor.

BEAR-AvHistory

Agree gearing is a big factor overall, but a lot of 0-60's runs are either one gear or one shift. Having more gears means you can have a steeper 1st unless its biased to the top for fuel economy. Will be able to tell when they publish the gear ratios.

Will have to look, my 7 speed shifts around 60 into 2nd, maybe just before or maybe just after, but I short shift. Generally runs the 1/4 mile in 3 gears peaking 3rd. The new 435 is an 8 speed, will be interesting to see how it does & how the ratios compare to the TLX.

Happy to see that the TLX looks to be back, personally I like the new version. If I was in the same market I was in when I bought the 3G TL I would have no problem buying the TLX. On the what would I add question. A HUD, they are very very slick not having to look down at the tack or nav screen.

SSFTSX

O.5 second is not big jump considering the light weight, improved torque of DI engine and new transmission. with additional class leading aerodynamics.


consider MDX with all season tire setup can do 0-60 in 6.4 second with same engine and 6speed auto. 0-100mph in 17.1 sec. MDX is quieter than BMW 3 series. mean some serious noise reducing rims are used that may inhibit performance.
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...wd-test-review

I would say that TLX FWD being 23% lighter than MDX and much more aerodynamic with new 9 speed transmition and sport+ mode should get big advantage. summer performance tire will give half a second additional advantage.


BMW 335 6MT with summer performace tire test 0-100 in 13 sec.
http://media.caranddriver.com/files/...ril-2012-1.pdf

technically its not big challenge for TLX to beat 335 numbers across the board when proper tire setup is provided.

BEAR-AvHistory

Problem is the magazines are all over the place. Recent R&T 4 way test

---- BMW --- ATS --- Q50S --- IS350F

0-60 --- 4.9 --- 5.4 --- 5.3 --- 5.4

0-100 --- 12.4 --- 13.5 --- 13.1 --- 13.3

QUARTER-MILE 13.5 sec @ 103.8 mph 14.0 sec @ 101.6 mph 13.8 sec @ 102.4 mph 13.9 sec @ 102.1 mph

TOP SPEED 155 mph (electronically limited) 149 mph (electronically limited) 155 mph (electronically limited) 143 mph (electronically limited)

Just 2 points on the BMW. The test you showed was a 6MT which is the slow ride, the AT's are measurably quicker, have been for a few years now. Also most guys looking for a sporty ride get the MPPK/MPE option about 342BHP. Motor Trend tested the older 320BHP PPK in a 335xi 4X4:

0-60 MPH 4.4 sec QUARTER MILE 13.0 sec @ 105.4 mph

I think you might want to look at beating the other three cars first.

BEAR-AvHistory

I what I read in the notes Corry posted they said a .5 reduction but never said what the base number was. To me its still a big number if they are talking in the high 4 low 5 range. Not as big, but still big, if its in the high 5 low 6 range.

The posted HP for the cars in the 4 way were BMW 300, ATS 321, Q50S 328, IS350F 306, Additionally two cars were in the 3500lbs range one 3600lbs range & the Lexus just over 3700lbs. The TL Advance SHAWD checks in at 4001lbs so 230lbs off that still leave it a bit porky compared to the other 4.

SSFTSX

in Honda case 6MT is usually lighter and deliver faster response.
but they say this 9speed auto is going to be lighter so there is likelihood that 9speed auto will provide 6MT equal performance.
the other 3 cars Accord equal in performance not TLX.

graphicguy

Having owned an '11 E92 335ix with the power pack, and a '13 S4 (bought back by Audi as a lemon), I can tell you an S4 isn't anywhere near a 4.4 sec 0-60. That's RS4 teritory, and a lot more money. My E92 would probably click off high 4 sec 0-60.....maybe 4.6 sec on a clear dry day, not too hot, not too cold.

Now, of the ones mentioned, an M3 will be knocking on the door of $70K+, as will the MB C63 (probably closer to $80K optioned like for like). An RS4 is going to be in the same ballpark as the M3 and C63.

Even at $10K less than the BMW 335i and Audi's S4 is, the TLX should be in the same range performance wise, luxury wise, sport wise, which is how they started the whole thing to begin with. Offer similar luxury, performance and quality of the Germans for a lot less money. They continue to do it, without the german car headaches.

Someone mentioned that they wanted a car that the "hardcore 1%" would want as a halo car. Well, sometime in the next 18 months, you'll get your wish with the new NSX coming out.

George Knighton

The RLX Hybrid's J Motor has been retuned prior to reaching the dealers, to specifically make it look better against the regular RLX Advance.

I would not be surprised if it got down to slightly below 5.0 in the hands of testers, even if Acura's published figure is a little higher.

SSFTSX

Accrod V6 6MT. 0-120mph in 20 seconds. that right BMW 335 category despite Accord on all season tire setup.


0-60mph testing is not that relevant compared to car behavior in 60 to 120mph that's where passing and merging happens.

frainc

This stuff with 0-60 and so on are not for 98% of the people who buy cars or care about it. How a car behavior in 60 to 120, where the hell do you do that! I have a 13 TL and its fast enough when I need to pass or merge, don't need anything more. If you need more then you need it for the track or drag racing, not everyday normal driving.

Let's wait until they test the TLX out for the times and then see where it falls with the other makes.

listrats

I got to be honest here. I am happy I did not wait and jumped on a loaded ATS instead.

Acura had an opportunity to be bold but they played the safe route in every single aspect. I am sure it will sell better than the 4G but to car enthusiasts this car just does nothing for me. It is a safe, average looking sedan. Rather than compete with BMW Mercedes Audi Cadilac (the re-emerging luxury brand) I see it as the alternate to the family who might want to spend a few more thousand on this car rather than a loaded Accord, for the step up in brand and bit of a step up in quality.

mylove4cars

Not really a Halo car like the NSX, a third variant for the sport minded. Without Turbo's Acura could easily bring that SH-AWD V6 up to 345 HP and 325 Lbs-Torque plus 6 MT some more weight loss plus factory aftermarket parts availability (Not forgetting the exhaust....) and make this baby rock.

BEAR-AvHistory

Only in the 6MT test. The Autos are a lot quicker & most cars will be auto. The 6MT guys me included give credit to the AT being quicker but the MT being more fun.

Personal experience have both 335is 7DCT & 135is 6MT; regardless who is driving what, the DCT always pulls away from the MT.

The R&T test shows the 335 AT at:

0/100 - 12.4
0/110 - 15.1
0/120 - 18.2
0/130 - 23.1

Then there is always the 342hp MPPK/PE to pile on. The old 320hp PPK version does 105.4 in 13.0

SSFTSX

I know auto 8speed BMW 335 are quicker than 6MT but I am just pointing out that TLX has implemented 9speed Auto. so there is reasonable chance it is going to be faster than 6MT Hondas.
in the past 6MT Hondas usually faster than 6speed Auto Hondas.

There are other variables like lighter weight, DI engine, aerodynamic efficiency (this thing is most important at speeds above 60mph) that will make TLX in 335M sport category despite not having a forced induction engine.

TheAcAvenger

The fact that automatic 335s are faster than manual 335s has nothing to do with gearing, its because the automatic cars hold boost between shifts and the manual cars don't. If a 6AT shifts into the next gear already at 7psi and the 6MT is starting from vacuum, it's going to make a noticeable difference in the quarter and in trap speeds. The 6AT 335s are faster than the 6MT 335s too. Generally, more gears is a performance disadvantage... trannies have gotten lighter and drivetrains have gotten a lot more efficient in getting the power to the ground, but improvements in drivetrain loss show up in wheel dynos. The 335 is just fast because it has more torque than its competitors over a larger range than its competitors.

BEAR-AvHistory

Also if Winstrolvtec's 230lb weight reduction is correct number the car will still be heavier than the 335i sedan by as much as 233lbs with not much torque to pull its extra weight compared to the turbos pumping almost 100% of available torque @ 1200rpm.

It could surprise everybody but I don't even see it having an edge on the Caddy, Infinity & Audi all of which are lighter & have more power.

FamilyGuy

Honda needs to wake up and smell the coffee...or better yet, inject some caffeine into their veins...yes, give us an econ model option, a middle of the pack option and a special edition / performance option. V6's now a days are ~mid 300's in HP...wtf are you thinking going backwards to under 300...? Disappointing. And it doesn't matter that it's not a type whatever model, it's the 3.5L v6 model - period - shouldn't have anything less than 320hp in today's market. Want to make it economical? That's what the 4cyl is for, or give us cylinder shut down technology. The NSX alone cant be your only performance guinea pig...we need affordable performance models in various price brackets...stop being 2 steps behind all the time, even my 07 type s is a bit of a joke, considering other v6's that year broke 300hp, plus it only came with vtec on intake side...hell, even my old 2004 volvo had vvt on intake and exhaust (s60r). Fools...

The new Infinity Q's are fugly and look to be made for 50 year olds (no offense)...
Nissans have nothing but the 370Z with its ugly fishhook lights...
Lexus nice but autos only no manuals option ugh...
BMWs / MBs / Audis nice but expensive and many lack a manual trans...
Mustang / camaro eh same crap different year, no exciting 4 door sport sedan worth a hoot...
Cadillacs seem to be the only ones kicking ass lately

Your opportunity for a comeback and what do you do? Release yet another boring ass, albeit good looking, yesterday's sedan...wake me up when the 6gen gets here...

SSFTSX

335 is fast not because it has more torque rather it is using summer performance tires and it is not inhibited by heavier noise reducing wheels.

why you think 6sp manual S5 coupe is faster than 6sp manual 435? despite S5 coupe is over 200lbs heavier.
http://www.caranddriver.com/comparis...specs-page-4-3

BEAR-AvHistory

Because the S5 has 33 more horsepower & 25ftlbs more torque. Pulls 11.5lbs per HP while the 435 is pulling 12.1lbs per horsepower.

You would have to be brain dead not to expect the S5 to be quicker unless the 4X4 can do a magic 60 foot time.

That being said the MPPK reverses the numbers with the old 320bhp version 335 at 13.0 to the S5's 13.2 over the quarter mile. Don't know what the new 342BHP MPPK will do but since its over 200lbs lighter than the S5 with more power & torque it should be quicker.

I would like to see the TLX put up some nice numbers but believe my 435M-Sport will have a good shot at the high 12's pure stock. I don't expect that to be in the cards for the TLX. I also do not believe it will run with the base 335i/435i either. Time will tell & C&D has always managed to pull good TL numbers out of their ears so there is hope.

SSFTSX

pulling 11.5 vs 12.1 is statistically insignificant to make such big difference in 0-60 timing of half a second. it is less than 10% difference.

There is no such thing as stock 335 in any of magazine tests. Stock means testing all season vs all season tire setup on heavier noise reducing rims setup in both cars.

see Acura RLX tests. on avg RLX do 0-60 in 5.8 seconds. RLX FWD is 10% heavier than TLX FWD (3600lbs weight). now 10% reduced weight compared to RLX, 9 speed transmission advantage, replacing heavier noise reducing rims with light weight sport rims, replacing heavier 500 tread wear fuel efficiency tires with 200 tread wear summer performance tires, 15% more aerodynamic efficiency. All these things combine should generate over 20% performance boost.
that's right under 5 second time in a vehicle that is much more spacious than BMW 3 series and will still be more quieter, superior fuel economic, more reliable and not sit so low to the ground.
All these factors led me to believe that there is absolutely zero advantage of forced induction engine at this time.

TheAcAvenger

.... guy, I've run all season tires on my 335 for 9 months a year since I got it 7 years ago. There's a reason I keep dismissing all this 0-60 drivel. It's all traction. I probably only run a 0-60 that's a few tenths of a second faster (at best) at 455whp/445wtq than I did bone stock at 270whp/280wtq. So sure, maybe 0-60, the tlx sh-awd will be faster than some cars the same way the STI/EVO were faster than M3s and Z06 Vettes in the mid 2000s. If you're talking about car vs car in a situation that doesn't rely on a launch, then what? Then, as I said, hp counts, torque counts, and your all wheel drive and tires aren't going to help you.

I'm pretty positive a stock 6AT 335 on regular high performance all season tires would walk anything in acura's lineup in a quarter mile. The power isn't there. Anyone will tell you that if you put a gun to my head and made me pick between my 335 and my RL, i'd pick my RL every damn time... but after driving the most recent TL-SHAWD, a 2014 accord, and the new q50... I don't have much hope for any japanese non-aspirated V6 being faster than turbocharged/supercharged offerings from germany.

SSFTSX

so you think that BMW 335 6MT that C&D tested will not lose performance edge to Accord V6 when you replace BMW 335 tires with Michlen Primacy?

Accord V6 6MT went to 0-120mph in 20 second. That's same time as 6MT BMW 335. so where you basing you non scientific judgement.
obviously you cannot compare 6AT Accord with 8speed BMW 335 as they have different transmission, one has DI and other does not have DI engine.
It has practically nothing to do with forced induction.

FamilyGuy

335s are underrated from factory. They're closer to ~330hp stock.

TheAcAvenger

I specified the 6AT, so you could hold boost between shifts, taking full advantage of the turbos, but i'll play along.

The 6MT BMW 335 did 0-120 in 19.3 seconds; 0-60: 5.3; 0-100: 13.0; 1/4: 13.8 @ 103 (So 60-100 in 7.7) ... With a test note underneath it that says "Whoa- slower than we expected, with the old car running to 60 in the high fours. It's not clear why, because the gearing has changed little and the 0-30 times are about right, so it launches as it should. After that, it fades. Local fuel octane issues, perhaps? (http://media.caranddriver.com/files/...ril-2012-1.pdf)

335i 8AT 0-60: 4.6; 0-100: 11.8; 1/4: 13.3 @ 105 (So 60-100 in 7.2)
(http://www.caranddriver.com/comparis...e-specs-page-5)

For reference: 2007 335i 6AT:0-60: 4.9; 0-100: 12.1; 1/4: 13.4 @ 106 (So 60-100 in 7.2)
(http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...take-road-test)

435i 6MT 0-60: 5.2 0-100: 12.2; 1/4: 13.7 @ 105 (So 60-100 in 7.0)
(from your S5 comparo; http://www.caranddriver.com/comparis...specs-page-4-3)

Accord Coupe 6MT 0-60: 5.6; 0-100: 13.4; 1/4: 14.0 @ 103 (So 60-100 in 7.8)
(http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...al-test-review)

Accord Coupe 6AT 0-60: 5.5; 0-100: 13.8; 1/4: 14.1 @ 101 (So 60-100 in 8.3)
(http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...ic-test-review)

So if we focus here on 60-100 or trap speeds (where the tires/drivers aren't the critical factors), there is indeed reason to believe that the fastest V6 Accord is as fast as the slowest 335i. If we remove take that 2012 test that car and driver itself questions, then in 60-100, the accord is down 0.6 seconds to 1.2 seconds (and using 60-100 negates the launch advantage of the sticky max summer tires).. so I stand by my previous statement.

But, there is no 6MT TLX, there is only an automatic version. Automatic's cause slower times in cars because you lose more crank horsepower to the drivetrain. In a forced induction car, the gain of holding boosts between shifts outweighs this. I don't even think we're having this conversation if Acura were offering a manual transmission or a dual clutch in this car. But a conventional torque-converter automatic... with 9 gears... That's a performance disadvantage to the 6MT accord

Additionally, the 6AT coupe weighs 3525 pounds and the 6MT accord coupe weighs 3400 pounds. For comparison, if the TLX were to weigh 200 pounds less than the 4th gen, it would weigh 3525 pounds in FWD and 3780 pounds in AWD. So you're looking at 100-400 pounds heavier than the fastest accord.

So you're asking direct injection in the TLX to overcome a 100-400 weight disadvantage to the accord AND the drivetrain losses from using a torque converter-automatic transmission. You're putting a whole lot of faith in direct injection. It wouldnt surprise me at all if the 6MT accord was faster than the 9AT TLX... but you're saying it's going to not only be faster, but make up 0.6 to 1.2 seconds from 60-100...

I don't see it.

But any gearhead or statistician would kill us for basing such a comparison off one source's best test figures with individual cars. I'd love to see a 9AT TLX or a 6MT accord go against a 335 head to head.

SSFTSX

All your historical results put Accord 0.6 to 1.2 second disadvantage compared to BMW 335. summer performance/performance rims do matter in higher speeds due to lower weight and lower ride height.



for TLX is not just DI engine advantage over Accord but sport+ mode in auto transmission and the most aerodynamic car in its class. That will significantly cut the wind resistance above 60mph. so the difference at higher speeds between BMW 335 and TLX will practically non existent.





so whats the point of putting unreliable forced induction engine?

BEAR-AvHistory

Summer tires are stock, its a performance thing, while all seasons are a no charge option. Personally since the best way to get traction with the 335 AT is to leave in 2nd gear I think the tire thing is a total bogus excuse. The Accord can run in 1st with its gearing advantage while a 1st gear start in the 335 means a lot of reduced throttle up into second gear so its a wash.

You don't want to compare things heads up because one car might have something the other car does not. Its always been "run what you brung" so that does not wash either.

All your percentages, 10% of this to 20% of that therefore this will happen etc is just making stuff up to try to prove a point. There is no way to tell how the TLX will run till it runs.

That being said the most recent C&D tests:

Accord V6 6MT
C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 5.6 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 13.4 sec
Zero to 120 mph: 20.0 sec
Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 6.0 sec
Top gear, 30-50 mph: 8.4 sec
Top gear, 50-70 mph: 8.1 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 14.0 sec @ 103 mph

435i 6MT
C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 5.2 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 12.2 sec
Zero to 150 mph: 32.8 sec
Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 6.0 sec
Top gear, 30-50 mph: 7.2 sec
Top gear, 50-70 mph: 6.9 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 13.7 sec @ 105 mph

335i 8AT
C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 4.6 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 11.8 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 21.8 sec
Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 5.5 sec
Top gear, 30-50 mph: 2.8 sec
Top gear, 50-70 mph: 3.2 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 13.3 sec @ 105 mph

335i 6MT 2012
C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 5.3 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 13.0 sec
Street Start, 5-60 mph: 5.9 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 13.8 sec @ 103 mph

TL SHAWD 6AT
C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 6.2 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 15.4 sec
Street start, 5-60 mph: 6.6 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 14.7 sec @ 98 mph

TL SHAWD 6MT
C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 5.2 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 13.5 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 26.5 sec
Street start, 5-60 mph: 5.8 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 13.8 sec @ 101 mph

Think we should park this one till the car gets tested.

BTW the next Accord or TL I lose to will be the first. You don't even need to run out hard to beat them. Just pace them till you have traction then go WOT & watch them in your rear view mirror. Check with the guys on this sites racing forum if you have any doubt.

Unfair advantage 275X30X19 Conti DW on the rears

SSFTSX

Thanks for posting this data. TL-SH-AWD 6AT was with all season tire setup and 6MT was with Pilot Sport PS2. 1 second difference between the two at 60mph transformed into almost 2 second difference at 100mph.
so from where this 1 second extra slowness at 100mph in 6AT comes from?. it means that all season tires are still inhibiting the performance at higher speeds.

BEAR-AvHistory

Or the trans sucks or the gearing is different or they ran a different day on a different track & so on. You cannot compare any time that was not run back to back on the same track.

Anyone who has ever bracket raced knows to raise the ET dial in during the afternoon eliminations over the morning time trials due to temp changes slowing the cars down.

The only thing these numbers will give you is trends & the trend is the TL finishes second in a two car race with a 335 & the newer base 335's are quicker than the older ones & the performance pack is 342hp instead of 320hp.

BEAR-AvHistory

So change the tires I changed mine at 1500 miles.

You still do not get the fact that magazine tests are not representative of what the cars will do in regular Joes hands. Its interesting that no one I know in my racing community (3 tracks) has ever seen a pure stock 6MT TL equal the C&D runs.

Sonnik who has a quick 6MT Accord ran seasons bests of:

2012 Season - 14.00 @102.09 stock
2013 Season - 13.54 @104.48 modified

Im done this is turning into a waste of all season tires, check back on this topic when the car is tested & a few show up at the track. Hope C&D gets a copy for this years Lightning Laps at VIR my BMW clubs home track. Also hope I get the Cobra done for next years season.

SSFTSX

I highly doubt 6AT transmission sucks at higher speed for Honda
RDX and X3 xdrive 28 has identical 0-60 times but X3 high speed performance completely collapses. This all due to heavier all season tires.

RDX 0-120 mph in 26 seconds.
http://media.caranddriver.com/files/...-acura-rdx.pdf

X3 xdrive 28. X3 has 8speed auto and a lot more torque than RDX.
0-120mph in 30.5 seconds

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...8i-test-review

winstrolvtec

I have zero issue with the RLX hybrid and it's times, I should have been more clear in stating that it was the TLX I was talking about. I don't think the TLX will be hitting 4's for the record but at the end of the day, we will all just have to wait and see, really wouldn't mind if I'm wrong FWIW.

.....

As far as the other part of the discussion others are carrying out, doesn't do too much good to start basing off of too many other things IMO. We don't know the drivetrain losses or the gear ratios, how fast it shifts or it's shift points, if it only engages low gears during hard driving, or if you are losing time with too many shifts, etc. In the past, I might just go along with it but it seems there is data to draw conclusions one way or another but there are usually a lot of variables with acceleration tests as is already, to start including and deducing or inferring from other models. So many other factors that contribute as well, hard to pick it apart and not take it as a whole in actual test results, for example.

Interesting point about the BMW autos holding boost at shifts, that helps understand the type of discrepancy we see between their 6MT and autos, which I always suspected was rather large but there are still other brands we can draw other conclusions from even if it's a smaller gap. For example, Porsche has a 7MT and it's considered slower and that's not just E/T, that's all range speeds and trap but it's also against a PDK which probably changes things a bit as well.

It varies, like at BMW with their auto vs manual for example, and the opposite at Honda for the time being, but it looks like in a general sense, manuals are not all that faster anymore. All in all, it's probably still even depending on the makes and models. 6MT and 7AT are very similar in times. The manual is lighter and it robs less power and has potential to launch harder but even a great driver can't usually shift as fast as a comparable auto, while the auto is heavier, robs more power but less driver error and influence, so largely evens out IMO.

It seems above 7 automatic gears and a lot of the additional advantages in acceleration are lost by having to shift so much more, so 8 and 9 are usually still as good as 7 as far as acceleration is concerned. Sure, we will see cases where it's different because it really depends on what the brand does with each specifically and in a very technical sense, so it's probably best to just see what they do and then how it turns out.

TheAcAvenger

So that 30hp advantage and 350 pound advantage in the RDX is moot?

TheAcAvenger

Porsche (PDK) and Audi S cars (DSG) are dual clutch transmissions, not automatics. They don't have torque converters and thus, they have the advantages of a manual (no additional drivetrain loss of power) but with the added bonus of faster-than-human shift speeds. BMW M cars run single clutch transmissions (SMG), which also lack torque converters. The GTR runs a dual clutch and one is available in the EVO.

Dual clutch transmissions > 6MT due to equivalent drivetrain loss, but enhanced shift speed

For naturally aspirated cars, where the automatic has no advantage in any way over the manual, the manual is always going to be faster if the gearing isn't dramatically different. Yes, the transmissions have gotten lighter and faster, but they rob power by design.

George Knighton

Exactly! And the direct injection versions of the J Motors are tuned wonderfully for that.

George Knighton

They're telling me to expect 1/2 s quicker to 60 vs the 4G SH-AWD 6 speed auto.

BEAR-AvHistory

^^^^

You can slice it up anyway you want but without a lot of cubic inches the N/A looses

Accord V6 6MT
C/D TEST RESULTS:
Top gear, 30-50 mph: 8.4 sec
Top gear, 50-70 mph: 8.1 sec
Zero to 120 mph: 20.0 sec

435i 6MT
C/D TEST RESULTS:
Top gear, 30-50 mph: 7.2 sec
Top gear, 50-70 mph: 6.9 sec

335i 8AT
C/D TEST RESULTS:
Top gear, 30-50 mph: 2.8 sec
Top gear, 50-70 mph: 3.2 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 21.8 sec

The current 335 8AT gets to 130 almost as fast as the Accord 6MT gets to 120 & 4+ seconds quicker than the TL 6MT.

TL SHAWD 6MT
C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 130 mph: 26.5 sec

So far the only test of the RLX SHAWD 377hp hybrid showed 4.8/4.9 to 60. It has the 7DCT & electric motors with max torque at launch for optimum 0-60 runs. Car weighs a bit over 4300lbs with tec pack. The TLX will be lighter but only has 267ftlbs of torque high up the rev range compared to both the RLX & turbo cars.

George Knighton

If those are the parameters you choose, then there's no arguing.

We're not going to be staying in "top gear" for our 25 to 80 mph merging into traffic.

I dissent from your view that your facts are relevant to normal drivers doing normal things with normal cars.

But it's your choice whether you view those facts as relevant parameters for making a decision on either a purchase or a vehicle design.

SSFTSX

when you compare Accord 6MT with 335 6MT you ignored the 50 fl-lb of extra torque, and 22 extra bhp of BMW335?.
RDX is also taller vehicle than X3 and RDX is 6AT while X3 is 8AT.
I am just pointing out that when BMW is on all season tires no amount of extra low end torque will help it against Honda.

TheAcAvenger

I didn't ignore it. It's my entire point, as it always has been, that the 335 is faster than the accord because it's more powerful than the accord. Those 2 cars are nearly equivalent in weight, use the same transmission technology, and the more powerful one is faster.

In the RDX 6AT vs X3 8AT example, the 6AT vs 8AT makes no difference. They're both automatics. You don't know which one of them has gear ratios tailored for performance at which speeds. You just know that the lighter one with more power is faster. You just proved my point.

The 335 will be lighter than the TLX with more power... and it will be faster.

SSFTSX

335 if equipped with large noise reducing rims and all season tires has no chance against Accord coupe let alone TLX.
4 second is too big a difference between RDX and X3 at 120mph.