- #29 of 194
-
Re: Might be absurd [fedlawman]
by johninnj
-
Jul 12, 2007 (4:12 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: fedlawman (Jul 12, 2007 3:02 pm)
Fair enough...I have both, actually. And my G is auto...complete with corny paddles but VERY nice rev-matched downshifting. That's what I meant with the TSX not really knowing what it is. 4 door hard-core...get an evo. 4 door comfy but fast...TL/G/IS/Legacy. 4 door cheap track burner...SRT/Mazdaspeed. In all fairness, all the loaner tsx's I drive were auto. Honda doesn't make an auto s2k for a reason (I still can't believe they made auto rx7tts).
|
- #30 of 194
-
Re: Might be absurd [johninnj]
by fedlawman
-
Jul 12, 2007 (5:40 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: johninnj (Jul 12, 2007 4:12 pm)
You have a nice fleet in your stable - not unlike my own choices. A sporty yet comfortable car for the week, and an unfiltered, uncompromised sports car for the weekend.
I guarantee if you take a TSX 6-speed for a spin, you'd understand. Off the top of my head, I would describe it as 65% TL (refinement, luxury) and 35% Miata (nimble, crisp).
|
- #31 of 194
-
Re: Might be absurd [fedlawman]
by silvertl
-
Jul 12, 2007 (8:33 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: fedlawman (Jul 12, 2007 5:40 pm)
I just might, because now I've become curious. I have driven a 6mt TL, and found the shifter to be a bit sloppy (Although pretty good for a front driver). I have a car-nut friend who now has a 911CS, who swears that his early 90's miata was the best shifting car he's ever owned. He's owned some really really really good cars, including an nsx, sti, rx7, s2k, and a gs-r. I still don't think I can get past a nearly 30K car that barely breaks 8 seconds 0-60 though. I stop at a lot of redlights! ! !
|
- #32 of 194
-
Re: Might be absurd [silvertl]
by silvertl
-
Jul 12, 2007 (8:43 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: silvertl (Jul 12, 2007 8:33 pm)
That's funny..my laptop has my old ID saved. I'm curious, do you think the tsx is sportier than a 325? I drove a 98 (I think) M3 HARD and I swear the front end felt as planted or more than the s2k. My friend who had a 2000 s2k said his was more lively than my "Watered down" 05 though.
|
- #33 of 194
-
Re: Might be absurd [fedlawman]
by sweendogy
-
Jul 14, 2007 (6:57 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: fedlawman (Jul 12, 2007 5:40 pm)
FEDLAW what do you drive?? Would like to know how you know so much about the ACURA TSX and The Infiniti G35. I have owned a 2000 Acura integra GS-R (loved the manual, the highrev engine was terrific for when I was in my early 20's) a 2003 VW Jetta GLI for the money I thought it was the best car I could get.. Had the Vr6 with the 6speed --had more grunt then the TSX without the need to unwind the engine to get it up to speed. Not as refined as the TSX, did not have the best service (VW vs acura) but my belief it was a more fun car to drive and again for the price was a hidden jewel-the new Jetta GlI is more TSX then old VR6 jetta. My move to G35x was a hard one for me as I had to give up the manual (living in new england wanted awd) but the engine power is addictive --the Car is not a "barge" or a "buick" (comments that are utterly redik) on the turns --yes its heavy compared to the TSX --yep-- but again its on a par with the TL (power to weight) the TSX and TL has had there run but need a injection of power and a face lift to spark new interest (2009 i think this will come) --for the money --power, technology, service, standard features its hard to knock the 07 G.. Please look at the articles that have written and tested both the sedan and coupe and the experts have had nothing but rave reviews for these cars -- plus consumer reports has the g on top for 2007--
|
- #34 of 194
-
Re: Might be absurd [sweendogy]
by fedlawman
-
Jul 14, 2007 (7:19 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: sweendogy (Jul 14, 2007 6:57 am)
I own a fully restored and stroked 1988 BMW M3 and a stock 2004 Volvo V70 wagon. I did own a TSX for 2 years and even tracked it a few times - that's how I came to know so much about it's handling and driveline dynamics.
I think the Integra GS-R and the TSX share quite a bit in common. The TSX is softer and heavier, but they both share that light, responsive "Honda feel" in the controls, driveline, and seat of the pants. The reason why I gush over the TSX's dynamics is because it feels a lot smaller and lighter than it really is when you push it. Turn-in is very quick and the car is eager to change direction.
With today's crop of "entry-level lux/sport" sedans hovering around 3600# and 300 hp, they have really grown too hefty for my tastes. I admit that calling the G35 a Buick or a barge is somewhat overblown, but I say it to make a point. When a car is this large and heavy, there is only so much you can do with fat tires and suspension tuning - the laws of physics can not be avoided. Yes, the G35 is an impressive GT car - fast, comfortable, and flat cornering. I just think it misses the mark as a sport sedan because of the faults I have previously pointed out.
|
- #35 of 194
-
Re: Might be absurd [fedlawman]
by sweendogy
-
Jul 15, 2007 (5:03 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: fedlawman (Jul 14, 2007 7:19 am)
88 M3 nice rig-- the huge wheel wells were either a love it or hate it but I personally loved it.. I agree with you on the TSX/ GS-R honda feel --the GS-R felt quicker but again at the sacrifice of luxury. (the integra and the G20 were the original entry level Japanese sedans). Now to get back to todays crop of lux sedans -- I agree with you they are a little "fat" but its what the buyers are asking for-- that is a car Packed with safety (airbags all over the place), technology, and AWD -- thus changing the LUX SPORT class altogether..
|
- #36 of 194
-
Re: Might be absurd [sweendogy]
by fedlawman
-
Jul 15, 2007 (6:33 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: sweendogy (Jul 15, 2007 5:03 pm)
"changing the LUX SPORT class altogether.."
For the worse, in my opinion. Consider...
15 years ago, a 1991 BMW 735i weighed 3800 lbs and had a 111.5" wheelbase. 10 years ago, a 1997 540i weighed 3700 lbs and had a 111.4" wheelbase.
The G35 weighs 3500 lbs and has a 112.2" wheelbase. The "entry-level" isn't entry-level anymore - they're all grown up and silver haired.
|
- #37 of 194
-
Re: Might be absurd [fedlawman]
by sweendogy
-
Jul 16, 2007 (9:58 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: fedlawman (Jul 15, 2007 6:33 pm)
"For the worse, in my opinion." I would agree but atleast they are putting more HPs in the engine to compensate a bit.. the old 540 what a great car that bmw made ugly
|
- #38 of 194
-
Re: Acura TSX vs. Infiniti G35 [fedlawman]
by kb124
-
Jul 19, 2007 (5:36 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: fedlawman (Jul 11, 2007 5:48 am)
My wife and I looked at and she test drove an Acura TL and TSX last night (a new car for her). While she and I are both impressed with the Acuras, we also both agree that neither model is like an Infiniti G35. I was surprised to hear her state that she thought the TL was overpriced, considering that a version with a Navigation system comes close to $37K. She feels at that price it puts the TL in the G35 range for a car pricewise, but it does not have that something 'extra' that the G35 has. And the TSX is even much less a comparison. (Odd that this thread even exists.) To me, a more real comparison would be the Acura-RL vs. the Infiniti-M series.
I like the Acuras but would not trade my new G35X for one. The G35X feels totally classy to me when I am in it. I thought the Navigation map was much cleaner on the G35. I thought it odd that to get Auto-Headlight-On/Off, you have to get a TL. TSX still has the manual mode.
The one thing that Acura's have that I wish the Infiniti had was DVD-Audio Surround Sound playback capabilities. Not a deal breaker, but a wish-list item.
|
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Sedans 
