|
|
|
|
 |
Hondarulez
 |
|
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/1205_sport_luxury_sedan_comparison/printer_friendly.html
Ranking & As-tested Price:
8th: Buick Regal GS $38,565
7th: Infiniti G25 $35,995
6th: Acura TSX V6 $39,335
5th: Lexus IS250 F-Sport $41,214
4th: Audi A4 Quattro $43,075
3rd: MB C250 $41,570
2nd: Volvo S60 T5 $34,505
1st: BMW 328i $50,560
Interesting Points:
- Buick Regal RS and BMW 328i both use 2.0T engines. The Regal has an extra 30hp/40lbft but has much worse EPA ratings and the worst real world mpg in the group
- Seems like the Buick Regal RS is a perfect example of a car that looks excellent on paper, but doesn't deliver the goods at all
- Not sure why MT brings in a $50k 328i...while all of the other cars are at least $7k less. In the case of the Volvo, it's a massive $16k difference. Why not bring in the $38k 300hp S60 T6 AWD, or the $43k 325hp S60 R-design? When loaded, the S60 R-design is at around $50k. Let's see how this car would do against the 328i.
- Same thing for the G25/IS250, why not the G37/IS350? Because the 328i uses the base engine, and so the other cars have to use the base engine too? Then how come they picked the TSX V6 model?
- Real world mpg: the 328i gets exactly the same mpg as the TSX V6 - 16.8mpg. And they are both nearly as fast as each other.
- From the article, it seems like the TSX V6 would have been a top-4 vehicle if it had better tranny, tires, and brakes. We know the tranny is at the end of its life cycle; tires and brakes are relatively easy upgrades to do in the aftermarket. Not bad. Just upgrading the tires alone would probably improve acceleration, braking, and handling by a lot.
Last edited by JeffX on 03-05-2012 14:31
|
JeffX
|
|
Hondarulez wrote:
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/1205_sport_luxury_sedan_comparison/printer_friendly.html
Ranking & As-tested Price:
8th: Buick Regal GS $38,565
7th: Infiniti G25 $35,995
6th: Acura TSX V6 $39,335
5th: Lexus IS250 F-Sport $41,214
4th: Audi A4 Quattro $43,075
3rd: MB C250 $41,570
2nd: Volvo S60 T5 $34,505
1st: BMW 328i $50,560
Interesting Points:
- Buick Regal RS and BMW 328i both use 2.0T engines. The Regal has an extra 30hp/40lbft but has much worse EPA ratings and the worst real world mpg in the group
- Seems like the Buick Regal RS is a perfect example of a car that looks excellent on paper, but doesn't deliver the goods at all
- Not sure why MT brings in a $50k 328i...while all of the other cars are at least $7k less. In the case of the Volvo, it's a massive $16k difference. Why not bring in the $38k 300hp S60 T6 AWD, or the $43k 325hp S60 R-design? When loaded, the S60 R-design is at around $50k. Let's see how this car would do against the 328i.
- Same thing for the G25/IS250, why not the G37/IS350? Because the 328i uses the base engine, and so the other cars have to use the base engine too? Then how come they picked the TSX V6 model?
- Real world mpg: the 328i gets exactly the same mpg as the TSX V6 - 16.8mpg. And they are both nearly as fast as each other.
- From the article, it seems like the TSX V6 would have been a top-4 vehicle if it had better tranny, tires, and brakes. We know the tranny is at the end of its life cycle; tires and brakes are relatively easy upgrades to do in the aftermarket. Not bad. Just upgrading the tires alone would probably improve acceleration, braking, and handling by a lot.
|
That 328i sounds mighty impressive. Even has the largest back seat of the test? It's a shame about the styling, however. It's gotten even uglier.
They were pretty nice to the TSX V6 - it's all motor - everything else is too luxed out to make it very interesting. If you think about it, the engine really isn't all that remarkable, except in that on a level playing field (FR chassis, same weight, enough gearing) , it likely would completely outperform the 328i that blew everybody away.
I mean seriously, 280hp from a 3.5L is nothing special these days, but it kills me knowing what it could be in a competitive chassis.
|
siegen
|
|
Hondarulez wrote:
Not sure why MT brings in a $50k 328i...while all of the other cars are at least $7k less. In the case of the Volvo, it's a massive $16k difference. Why not bring in the $38k 300hp S60 T6 AWD, or the $43k 325hp S60 R-design? When loaded, the S60 R-design is at around $50k. Let's see how this car would do against the 328i.
- Same thing for the G25/IS250, why not the G37/IS350? Because the 328i uses the base engine, and so the other cars have to use the base engine too? Then how come they picked the TSX V6 model?
|
Most auto mags test what is available or can be loaned out, so a lot of comparisons, like this one, vary greatly in price. The more expensive the test vehicles, the larger the variance.
Price also takes a back seat, since the journalists aren't buying the cars. They simply don't care how much it costs. If the cars are in the same class then the comparison is valid in their opinions I guess.
Comparing at $50k, they could have gotten a TL SH-AWD with all the bells and whistles, and then some, which I'm sure would have done a lot better (especially the 6MT version).
|
DCR
|
|
They explained why they had a $50k BMW there.
The Internet has fundamentally changed the way we write about cars. Why's that? Your thoughtful, loving comments, of course! Unlike in the old days where my predecessors would cherry-pick only the best, friendliest letters to the editors (and spellcheck 'em), today whatever you have to say becomes permanently affixed to the article in question, online. And lest you feel like you're writing to each other, be assured, we read your comments. I mention this because I want to talk about the big albatross hanging around the new 328i's neck right up front: price. This car rings the bell to the tune of $50,560, by far the highest as-tested price of the competition. Shock! Horror! You all will cancel your subscriptions en masse, of course the most expensive car won, because we're all idiots, etc.
Yes, yes, yes. We know. However, unlike the other seven competitors, this particular car was driven away from the U.S. 3 Series launch BMW held in San Francisco where the cars were (of course) trimmed out with all the fixings. The point I want to make is that, using BMW's online configurator, you can spec out a mechanically identical 328i Sport Line for $41,095 that would have beat up on and choked out the competition just like the one in our test did. Questions? |
|
Nick GravesX
|
|
It's how BMW ensure they always win the tests; spec it up with about £/$20,000 in options & the testers 'forget' when they're driving it.
It usually includes oversized wheels & sports suspension & stuff...
It'd be like Honda turning up to a group test with a carefully modded, Rotrexed S2000 they 'borrowed' from S2ki and thrashing a Boxster S...
|
TonyEX
|
|
DCR wrote:
They explained why they had a $50k BMW there.
The Internet has fundamentally changed the way we write about cars. Why's that? Your thoughtful, loving comments, of course! Unlike in the old days where my predecessors would cherry-pick only the best, friendliest letters to the editors (and spellcheck 'em), today whatever you have to say becomes permanently affixed to the article in question, online. And lest you feel like you're writing to each other, be assured, we read your comments. I mention this because I want to talk about the big albatross hanging around the new 328i's neck right up front: price. This car rings the bell to the tune of $50,560, by far the highest as-tested price of the competition. Shock! Horror! You all will cancel your subscriptions en masse, of course the most expensive car won, because we're all idiots, etc.
Yes, yes, yes. We know. However, unlike the other seven competitors, this particular car was driven away from the U.S. 3 Series launch BMW held in San Francisco where the cars were (of course) trimmed out with all the fixings. The point I want to make is that, using BMW's online configurator, you can spec out a mechanically identical 328i Sport Line for $41,095 that would have beat up on and choked out the competition just like the one in our test did. Questions? |
|
Still.... maybe M&T should have opted for the TL SH-AWD MT6... for that price.....
|
Hondarulez
|
|
Jeff, I thought the new 3 series looks better than before....may be it's just me....
Yea, the powertrain in the TSX isn't anything that we haven't seen before. On the other hand, you have already witnessed first hand what the J37 can do with 6MT and SH-AWD.
Thanks for the quote there DCR. I missed that part...but there's one thing that bothers me - they are using a car supplied from a BMW launch event. Not saying it's 100% true, but isn't it possible that the car is "better than usual" somewhat? I mean, when Acura launched an event to compare the TL SH-AWD 6MT against S4, 335i, G35, etc, people were like, obviously the TL would win since it's an Acura event. I think this is something that we should keep in mind....not taking anything away from the 328i....which is no doubt, an excellent car.
I understand that auto mags can only test cars that are available to them. However, I think MT gotta do better than this comparison....some of the differences are just too large to ignore. A G37 would have destroyed the competition in this test. Same for the S60 T6/R Design. A TL SH-AWD 6MT is also within the price range and will solve those problems mentioned by the article: brakes, grip, tranny.
|
MasterOfDaDomain
|
|
Doesn't matter, it's about comparing the base level luxury cars from each car maker. (of course, for Buick and Acura, that means bring the fastest Regal and TSX.)
I agree it would be interesting to see BMW 335i vs. TL 6MT.
I like the design the new F30 much better than the low rent style of E90.
|
mobis21
|
|
More examples of turbo motors gaming the EPA.
Direct injected, turbo
BMW rated 24 city 36 highway, and averaged 16.8 -7.2
Buick rated 20 city 32 highway, and averaged 14.6 -5.4
Normally aspirated
Acura rated 19 city, and averaged 16.8 -2.2
|
A77
|
|
Oh wow - now lets analyse the numbers a bit. the BMW is a few hundred pounds lighter than the Acura, has an 8 speed tranny, is rear wheel drive and is a newer design. Despite all this it is no quicker than the Acura once the Acura has launched. the Acura only looks slower on paper as it takes longer to get to 30mph. thereafter it is just as quick. And lo and behold, despite being a super efficient turbo engine and weighing less than the Acura and its antideluvian V6 - they get exactly the same recorded mpg!!!
Sure now being an owner of a TSX I automatically become an apologist. But this test is just further proof that turbo engines and multi speeded trannies achieve nothing better in the real world. Apart from V6s sounding delicious and the BM sounding, their words, like a diesel.
whats an IS250 doing here - may as well have a 4 cyl TSX.
|
typer_801
|
|
SUre you can spec one out for less, but it won't have any features the rest of the competition has....the BMW is overpriced!!! Honestly, there are very few considering a mid-$30K sedan that would cough up $50 necessary to get into a 3-series.
I like BMW's more than most, but they are incredibly expensive these days.
TonyE wrote:
DCR wrote:
They explained why they had a $50k BMW there.
The Internet has fundamentally changed the way we write about cars. Why's that? Your thoughtful, loving comments, of course! Unlike in the old days where my predecessors would cherry-pick only the best, friendliest letters to the editors (and spellcheck 'em), today whatever you have to say becomes permanently affixed to the article in question, online. And lest you feel like you're writing to each other, be assured, we read your comments. I mention this because I want to talk about the big albatross hanging around the new 328i's neck right up front: price. This car rings the bell to the tune of $50,560, by far the highest as-tested price of the competition. Shock! Horror! You all will cancel your subscriptions en masse, of course the most expensive car won, because we're all idiots, etc.
Yes, yes, yes. We know. However, unlike the other seven competitors, this particular car was driven away from the U.S. 3 Series launch BMW held in San Francisco where the cars were (of course) trimmed out with all the fixings. The point I want to make is that, using BMW's online configurator, you can spec out a mechanically identical 328i Sport Line for $41,095 that would have beat up on and choked out the competition just like the one in our test did. Questions? |
|
Still.... maybe M&T should have opted for the TL SH-AWD MT6... for that price.....
|
|
mobis21
|
|
I would give the win to the Volvo.
It's by far the best looking inside and out. The BMW was a freakish 47% more expensive than the Swede. Sorry, that's an entirely different playing field at that much more.
Volvo for the win.
|
superchg2
|
|
|
Unless you special order, Beemer's always seem to be too expensive in their class!
|
A77
|
|
That Volvo interior somehow doesn't quite work. For me anyway - I think the Mercedes has the nicest interior, in the photos anyway, and the smartest, classiest exterior. I have driven one - a very boring drive. Usual Mercedes unresponsive accelerator and woolly steering. Just a dead car. With hard flat seats.
the Audi looks nice inside too and probably "feels" nicest - just an ugly steering wheel. The BMW is very nice too - and hopefully feels less low, ok middle, rent than the old 3 series.
|
CarPhreakD
|
|
Borrowing DCR's channeling of Bob Lutz, I'd like to say firstly that MT is a crock of shit!
Actually, it kind of amazes me that the 3-series is still faster than the TSX. It seems that the reports of "under-rating" were actually true for the most part, as the engine should produce more in the area of 270-ish horsepower... that plus the BMW's light weight and RWD (for launch) was why it was faster despite being down on power. The TSX really starts to pull away by the end of the 1/4 mile though, noting the higher trap speed! I'm not sure how they're doing their fuel economy loop, but it's actually kind of funny how the turbo Regal does a lot worse than the BMW.
But, the $50K in options is kind of insane, and the same thing happened with InsideLine's test. If BMW still uses runflats and large cast wheels, I'd avoid the car altogether as they have a reputation for squaring themselves every few thousand km. And the interior is no way befitting a luxury car.
|
MalcolmR
|
|
A77 wrote:
Oh wow - now lets analyse the numbers a bit. the BMW is a few hundred pounds lighter than the Acura, has an 8 speed tranny, is rear wheel drive and is a newer design. Despite all this it is no quicker than the Acura once the Acura has launched. the Acura only looks slower on paper as it takes longer to get to 30mph. thereafter it is just as quick. And lo and behold, despite being a super efficient turbo engine and weighing less than the Acura and its antideluvian V6 - they get exactly the same recorded mpg!!!
Sure now being an owner of a TSX I automatically become an apologist. But this test is just further proof that turbo engines and multi speeded trannies achieve nothing better in the real world. Apart from V6s sounding delicious and the BM sounding, their words, like a diesel.
whats an IS250 doing here - may as well have a 4 cyl TSX.
|
.
Well said, A77.
Plus you've bought greater reliability, quality and perhaps resale value.
Plus what are you doing with the money you saved on purchase?
Malcolm
:)
|
carcrazy84
|
|
Well said? Come on, half of what he said isn't true. The BMW is not "a few hundred pounds" lighter, it's 161 lbs lighter. And it is quicker than the TSX in every way but one, quicker than it should be given it's rated power to weight. Edmunds has dyno'd the engine and shown it to be underrated by at least 30 hp. Give credit where credit is due.
And the mileage in this comparison is nearly worthless. They obviously drove the cars aggressively and made no effort to do it consistently. It's absurd to conclude anything about real world economy.
|
A77
|
|
my approximation of a few hundred pounds = 200 lbs which is a rounded up 161. The TSX's times are all faster apart from the 0-30 and 0-50. Not quite sure where you get your "half not true" estimate from. If the BMW is really that under-rated and is RWD, and lighter and has an 8 speed, how can it possibly be slower 30-100 than a TSX?. And it's their words not mine that it can sound like a diesel.
Also note the TSX has a much bigger fuel tank.
As fas as the TSX' less grippy tires are concerned you get to a point where super grippiness is just boring. Cars are only really entertaining to corner at their limits of adhesion. While you have to have a decently high level for safety sake, the fact is that if the limits are so high they can only be safely explored on a track, then the car is going to be less interesting on road. Probably stirring up a hornets' nest here.
I don't doubt for one moment that the BMW is the best car here by some margin. But it is more expensive to buy and will cost more to run; regardless of mpg - in the real world it remains to be seen whether it is any better than the TSX.
besides which my primary point is that going by the numbers alone the BMW simply does not have a standard setting powertrain. The tri-turbo 550D does though!
|
CR-V9
|
|
A77 wrote:
[ ... ]
As fas as the TSX' less grippy tires are concerned you get to a point where super grippiness is just boring. Cars are only really entertaining to corner at their limits of adhesion. While you have to have a decently high level for safety sake, the fact is that if the limits are so high they can only be safely explored on a track, then the car is going to be less interesting on road. Probably stirring up a hornets' nest here.
[ ... ]
|
|
typer_801
|
|
Some of us wish Honda would spec up their cars with 'oversized wheels and sport suspensions & stuff...'
The one size fits all, vanilla is the only flavor we offer, strategy doesn't appeal to everyone, particularly the automags and enthusiasts (like myself).
Seemed to make the way-beyond-its-prime Lexis IS250 fare well. That car has been out since 2006 with lackluster powertrain and still finished ahead of the TSX. It sounded as though the F-sport package (oversized wheels, sport suspensions & stuff) help contribute to that. Also, that package is more of Acura should have constructed it's TSX SE package IMO, it's a lot more appealing.
Nick Graves wrote:
It's how BMW ensure they always win the tests; spec it up with about £/$20,000 in options & the testers 'forget' when they're driving it.
It usually includes oversized wheels & sports suspension & stuff...
It'd be like Honda turning up to a group test with a carefully modded, Rotrexed S2000 they 'borrowed' from S2ki and thrashing a Boxster S...
|
|
Hondarulez
|
|
MasterOfDaDomain wrote:
Doesn't matter, it's about comparing the base level luxury cars from each car maker. (of course, for Buick and Acura, that means bring the fastest Regal and TSX.)
I agree it would be interesting to see BMW 335i vs. TL 6MT.
I like the design the new F30 much better than the low rent style of E90.
|
There will always be arguments regarding this topic - should car mags compare the base level of each car? Or should they compare cars that are within the price range of each other?
Obviously with more $$, BMW can spend more to make their base models better, don't you agree? Then again, BMW has done a lot in the past to build its reputation so that its cars are worthy of the price tag. There's always a dilemma.
For Acura enthusiasts, we can't help but to come up with a lot of "what if's" questions. What if the TSX V6 had a performance package (better brakes, sportier suspension, more grippy tires)? What if they take price into consideration and uses a TL 6MT?
|
Hondarulez
|
|
carcrazy84 wrote:
Well said? Come on, half of what he said isn't true. The BMW is not "a few hundred pounds" lighter, it's 161 lbs lighter. And it is quicker than the TSX in every way but one, quicker than it should be given it's rated power to weight. Edmunds has dyno'd the engine and shown it to be underrated by at least 30 hp. Give credit where credit is due.
And the mileage in this comparison is nearly worthless. They obviously drove the cars aggressively and made no effort to do it consistently. It's absurd to conclude anything about real world economy.
|
MotorTrend, in another test, observed 30.6mpg in the real world on the hwy driving at around 75mph on average. This is roughly the same as what Jeff got in a TSX V6.
It's not really "absurd" when more than one test shows similar results. Beside, this is pretty much the only way we can compare real world mpg. Sure, the 328i was driven aggressively, but so did all the other cars. Each car was driven by all editors. Each car was tested in the same loop. Each car was tested at around the same time/weather.
Yes, you cannot make an absolute conclusion, but you can definite get an idea of what the car would get, under aggressive driving.
Now, consider several things: the N20 brand new with a lot of new technologies: start/stop, DI, turbocharged, etc. It got an 8-speed AT. It's lighter. In theory, the car should be way more efficient (i.e. 20%+) than an outdated J35+5AT, don't you agree?
What's the point of going with boost, if you have to baby the throttle to see some results?
|
Hondarulez
|
|
typer_801 wrote:
Some of us wish Honda would spec up their cars with 'oversized wheels and sport suspensions & stuff...'
The one size fits all, vanilla is the only flavor we offer, strategy doesn't appeal to everyone, particularly the automags and enthusiasts (like myself).
Seemed to make the way-beyond-its-prime Lexis IS250 fare well. That car has been out since 2006 with lackluster powertrain and still finished ahead of the TSX. It sounded as though the F-sport package (oversized wheels, sport suspensions & stuff) help contribute to that. Also, that package is more of Acura should have constructed it's TSX SE package IMO, it's a lot more appealing.
Nick Graves wrote:
It's how BMW ensure they always win the tests; spec it up with about £/$20,000 in options & the testers 'forget' when they're driving it.
It usually includes oversized wheels & sports suspension & stuff...
It'd be like Honda turning up to a group test with a carefully modded, Rotrexed S2000 they 'borrowed' from S2ki and thrashing a Boxster S...
|
|
Yea, this reminds of me of the 3G TL 6MT A-spec with its sportier tires, suspension, and brembo brakes.
Actually, this makes me wonder, how would the 3G TL Type S 6MT w/ summer tires do in this test? It would tie with the 328i from 0-60mph, and it would have a faster 1/4 mile time and trap speed. It was priced at $38-$39k, similar to the TSX V6. It got better brakes, better tires, better tranny, and sportier suspension than the TSX - things that MotorTrend would like to see that would definitely make the TSX a Top-4 car.
|
CarPhreakD
|
|
A77 wrote:
my approximation of a few hundred pounds = 200 lbs which is a rounded up 161. The TSX's times are all faster apart from the 0-30 and 0-50. Not quite sure where you get your "half not true" estimate from. If the BMW is really that under-rated and is RWD, and lighter and has an 8 speed, how can it possibly be slower 30-100 than a TSX?. And it's their words not mine that it can sound like a diesel.
Also note the TSX has a much bigger fuel tank.
As fas as the TSX' less grippy tires are concerned you get to a point where super grippiness is just boring. Cars are only really entertaining to corner at their limits of adhesion. While you have to have a decently high level for safety sake, the fact is that if the limits are so high they can only be safely explored on a track, then the car is going to be less interesting on road. Probably stirring up a hornets' nest here.
I don't doubt for one moment that the BMW is the best car here by some margin. But it is more expensive to buy and will cost more to run; regardless of mpg - in the real world it remains to be seen whether it is any better than the TSX.
besides which my primary point is that going by the numbers alone the BMW simply does not have a standard setting powertrain. The tri-turbo 550D does though!
|
That last point is very interesting. There's not a ton of interest from most mainstream manufacturers in copying BMW's tri-turbo setup, and I'm sure you can imagine why... on the other hand, the N20 is being benchmarked by everybody...
|
CarPhreakD
|
|
Hondarulez wrote:
MasterOfDaDomain wrote:
Doesn't matter, it's about comparing the base level luxury cars from each car maker. (of course, for Buick and Acura, that means bring the fastest Regal and TSX.)
I agree it would be interesting to see BMW 335i vs. TL 6MT.
I like the design the new F30 much better than the low rent style of E90.
|
There will always be arguments regarding this topic - should car mags compare the base level of each car? Or should they compare cars that are within the price range of each other?
Obviously with more $$, BMW can spend more to make their base models better, don't you agree? Then again, BMW has done a lot in the past to build its reputation so that its cars are worthy of the price tag. There's always a dilemma.
For Acura enthusiasts, we can't help but to come up with a lot of "what if's" questions. What if the TSX V6 had a performance package (better brakes, sportier suspension, more grippy tires)? What if they take price into consideration and uses a TL 6MT?
|
The reason why BMWs are expensive is what type_801 is saying about options vs. packages. Unfortunately if you want an inexpensive car, you're likely to find systems bundled together in packages, which saves the automaker from plant complexity and having to custom build each model. Individual options are more expensive.
|
CarPhreakD
|
|
By the way, an 8 speed does not automatically equate to faster acceleration times in a race, because you're never going to use all the gears. In this case I'm willing to bet that the BMW only used the first 4 gears for the acceleration run, while the TSX used... 4. The obvious point of the 8 speeder is matching revs to cruising speeds more closely.
That 8 speed, btw, is patented and manufactured by ZF, and is used by Chrysler and the other German OEMS as well. It's a highly advanced unit because of its low shift times and low parasitic losses.
|
Hondarulez
|
|
Of course, more speeds does not automatically = faster. With that said, the lower shift times, lower parasitic losses, and perhaps better gear ratios should all contribute to faster acceleration.....vs the TSX.
|
Fan Koni
|
|
Hondarulez wrote:
typer_801 wrote:
Some of us wish Honda would spec up their cars with 'oversized wheels and sport suspensions & stuff...'
The one size fits all, vanilla is the only flavor we offer, strategy doesn't appeal to everyone, particularly the automags and enthusiasts (like myself).
Seemed to make the way-beyond-its-prime Lexis IS250 fare well. That car has been out since 2006 with lackluster powertrain and still finished ahead of the TSX. It sounded as though the F-sport package (oversized wheels, sport suspensions & stuff) help contribute to that. Also, that package is more of Acura should have constructed it's TSX SE package IMO, it's a lot more appealing.
Nick Graves wrote:
It's how BMW ensure they always win the tests; spec it up with about £/$20,000 in options & the testers 'forget' when they're driving it.
It usually includes oversized wheels & sports suspension & stuff...
It'd be like Honda turning up to a group test with a carefully modded, Rotrexed S2000 they 'borrowed' from S2ki and thrashing a Boxster S...
|
|
Yea, this reminds of me of the 3G TL 6MT A-spec with its sportier tires, suspension, and brembo brakes.
Actually, this makes me wonder, how would the 3G TL Type S 6MT w/ summer tires do in this test? It would tie with the 328i from 0-60mph, and it would have a faster 1/4 mile time and trap speed. It was priced at $38-$39k, similar to the TSX V6. It got better brakes, better tires, better tranny, and sportier suspension than the TSX - things that MotorTrend would like to see that would definitely make the TSX a Top-4 car.
|
MT only compares AT "sporty luxury sedans"...
This is all just so wrong.
I wonder how the V6 will do with DI, packed in totally new cars.
Honda even took weight of the CRV and lowered the CG, since they announced to do so on the accord, I really except more work on a TSX/TL.
Plus the Accord V6 was promised to get MT.
|
A77
|
|
|
I drove a friend's Cayenne with presumably the same 8 speed last week - very smooth shifts.
|
carcrazy84
|
|
| how can it possibly be slower 30-100 than a TSX? |
You're clearly looking at the wrong chart. The BMW is the quickest car in the comparison. Look for that one.
Calling a 161 lbs "a few hundred pounds" is ridiculous.
|
|
|
| |
|
| Thread Page - [1] 2 3 4 |
| |
|
![[home]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/home.gif){kind=small}
![[rumors and news]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/rumors.gif){kind=small}
![[model release matrix]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/newmodelreleasematrix.gif){kind=small}
![[dealer network]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/dealernet.gif){kind=small}
![[desktop calendar]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/calendar.gif){kind=small}
![[exhaust notes]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/exhaust.gif){kind=small}
![[tov forums]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/forums.gif){kind=small}
![[links]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/links.gif){kind=small}
![[search]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/search.gif){kind=small}
![[sponsors]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/sponsors.gif){kind=small}
![[garage]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/garage.gif){kind=small}
![[login]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/login.gif){kind=small}
