Last post on Jan 07, 2010 at 7:50 AM
You are in the Acura TSX
What is this discussion about?
Acura TSX, Car Buying, Sedan
Apr 24, 2008 (7:23 pm)
all the most successful luxury brands make their most car sales from their smallest models, ALL of which are smaller than TSX (325i, IS, C-class, etc). Acura could sell a smaller more nimble model. I think the main problem with the RSX (in Honda's mind) was that it was too cheap to be taken seriously. I was thinking of reintroducing a proper $25-27K model below the TL.
As for the TSX itself, I actually almost bought this car back in 2004 for $26K, and in 2004, for $26K, the TSX was a competitive car. In 2008, at $29K and with the same powertrain, it is falling behind, that's all I'm saying.
The 2010 diesel will boost sales though, I have no doubt. And I bet that when the 2010 cars finally get here, that other optional engine will be the RDX turbo, not a 6-cylinder. Any takers?!...
#46 of 368 don't forget (dairyshick) (nippononly)
Apr 24, 2008 (11:54 pm)
If you assume the annual inflation rate between '04 and '08 was 3%, then $26,000 back then is the equivalent of $29,263 today (four years later). Therefore, if the '04 TSX was a "competitive car" in '04, one could argue that the '09 TSX remains competitive, especially if, (a) one considers the '09 to be at least a little improved overall compared with the '04, and, (b) the '09 is five models years newer than the '04, which is a positive factor in terms of depreciation. Of course, these considerations have to be weighed against the progress that competing models - the IBM 325, Lexus IS, Volvo S60, Audi A-4, Saab 9-2 2.0 turbo - have made. While one's conclusion comes down to a value judgement, I think one can argue that the '09 TSX in '08 remains about as good a value as the '04 was in its day. Part of my thinking is that, like the TSX, the competing models haven't made dramatic strides over the past four years either.
Of course, today you could also cross shop a Pontiac G-8 V6 against the TSX, and while the G-8 is even larger than the TSX, and its reliability might not be up to Acura standards, it may be a better near luxury value.
#47 of 368 Re: I disagree (dairyshick) [hpmctorque]
Apr 25, 2008 (2:03 am)
If the Honda statements about the launch of Acura in Europe are to be believed the entire lineup will go RWD by 2015, The TSX can't stay FWD if Acura plans to sell it in Europe - badge engineering won't work there - they'd need something very different from the EuroAccord. Like Lexus, Acura could leave the TL to compete with the ES while having a compact entry level (future TSX), mid size (future RL) and full size (??? start watching the trademark submissions for names from Honda) and the NSX (to compete with LF-A). Everything besides the TL would be based on some RWD platform.
Hosts, since the 09 TSX is officially out this should be moved from future vehicles to the TSX threads.
#48 of 368 Re: don't forget (dairyshick) (nippononly) [hpmctorque]
Apr 25, 2008 (6:54 am)
"If you assume the annual inflation rate between '04 and '08 was 3%, then $26,000 back then is the equivalent of $29,263 today"
Yeah, but that's not the way it works with cars, particularly "all new" models introduced during a recession. Take any model of car and track its base price backwards in time. They don't generally rise at the rate of inflation.
Example: VW Passat turbo (base engine). List in 2002 was $23,375. Base price today for the '08 is $23,990 according to Edmunds.
Example: 2002 Acura TL, list $29,360. The 2008 Acura TL, a car that I think we can all agree was COMPLETELY remade and enormously improved for MY 2004, lists at $33,725, a barely 2% increase per year.
Example: BMW 3-series. In 2002 the base model was the 325i, listing at $32,465. The 2008 base model is the 328i, listing at $32,400. Makes the 328i look like a bargain today, huh?!
My point is, car prices do not rise at the same rate as inflation.
And yes, as you stated, the TSX has to "be weighed against the progress that competing models - the IBM 325, Lexus IS, Volvo S60, Audi A-4, Saab 9-2 2.0 turbo - have made."
It is in this area that I find it coming up short. I have now driven it (I am on my dealer's listserve as I used to own an Acura, so I was invited to come drive it now that dealers have it in stock) and find it to be not notably improved from the '04 I drove before, in terms of driving dynamics and performance. Yes, there is more techno wizardry in the cockpit, but in the end those are just gizmos. I like to drive for driving's sake.
#49 of 368 Re: don't forget (dairyshick) (nippononly) (biker4)
Apr 25, 2008 (7:44 am)
biker4: Interesting information about future Acuras, biker4. I had read something similar to what you wrote recently, but didn't have confidence in my source. Conversion to RWD for most of its models makes perfect sense for Acura, though, if they're serious about competing with the top tier luxury brands in world markets.
If Acura is going to retain one FWD model, shouldn't that be the TSX, rather than the TL? The tradeoffs favoring FWD tend to be greatest in smaller, four cylinder cars than larger sixes, just as the the greatest relative advantages of RWD are in high torque V8s, V10s, and V12 applications.
nippononly: "...the TSX has to "be weighed against the progress that competing models - the IBM 325..."
You meant BMW, of course.
"... there is more techno wizardry in the cockpit, but in the end those are just gizmos. I like to drive for driving's sake."
I agree 100%. Telematics generally doesn't excite me much, although I appreciate certain features, such as traction control, anti-lock brakes, and electronic stability control. These are wonderful features. I can't warm up to features such as lane departure alerts or controls, or automatic parking. Beeps, vibrations and other alerts would be especially annoying to me. I may exclude certain luxury models from consideration in the future, because they tend to be crammed with telematic features that have a negative value for me.
#50 of 368 My observation
Apr 26, 2008 (8:29 am)
#51 of 368 Re: don't forget (dairyshick) (nippononly) (biker4) [hpmctorque]
Apr 27, 2008 (11:05 am)
On the surface it might make sense to keep the TSX FWD but there's a couple of reasons I don't think it will happen. First the TL is so established, like the ES was for Lexus, they can't kill its formula. Unlike now where they basically have 3 mid sized sedans, if/when they switch to RWD, there'll be much bigger difference in sizes. So the TSX would actually shrink to not only make it different from the RL in the US but also different from the EuroAccord in other markets. Because in other markets badge engineering doesn't work the TSX has to be RWD to differentiate it from Honda offerings.
May 02, 2008 (6:42 pm)
I looiked at and sat in the '09 TSX at the Acura dealer, but didn't test drive it. The '09 looks better from the side and from the back, in my opinion, than the previous generation TSX. The front doesn't look as good, and while I'm not a fan of the new grille, I could live with it. The interior of the new model looks better, but I miss the faux wood grain applications that came with some color combinations, and doesn't in the '09. All '09s come with the brushed metal look. It's contemporary, but I prefer the older wood grain look.
The biggest weakness of the interior is the modest rear seat leg room. It's rather tight back there, unless the front passengers put their seats up quite a bit.
May 03, 2008 (1:27 am)
I should add that the wheelbase and overall length of the '09 TSX are 1 1/2 inches longer and 2 inches longer, respectively, than those of the '08 TSX. Also, the rear seat leg room of the TSX is slightly less than that of the Honda Civic (34.3 inches vs. 34.6 inches) and 1.8 inches less than the '08 Ford Focus 4 door. Further, the BMW 3-Series sedan provides .3 inches more leg room, despite being RWD and 8 inches shorter overall than the '09 TSX. These comparisons were made using Edmund's New Car Comparison Specs.
Keep these comparisons in mind if you should try the back seat of the new TSX, and see if you don't agree that, given the increased size of the car, Acura should have provided rear seat passengers with greater leg room. The considerable increase in width of the new model doesn't compensate for the lack of more back seat legroom. It's disappointing.
May 16, 2008 (12:14 pm)
Edmunds full test of the new TSX is very unflattering. In view of this, I'll be following the sales figures of this car with much interest. They'll say a lot about whether buyers of this car put more value on styling, options, and Acura's reliability than the driving experience, which isn't great, according to Edmunds.
I hope the '09 TL fares better than the TSX.