|
|
|
|
 |
typer_801
 |
|
I think it's fair to ding Acura for calling this a performance version. It can't outperform a Civic Si, a car which most don't consider to be a performance car these days itself. On top of that it, still costs $8K more than said Civic Si.
Used to be table stakes for Acura's to outperform their Honda siblings. Sadly, it's no longer the case. So I'd recommend you quit defending Acura, it'll just encourage them to keep making these cars no one wants to buy!
sadlerau wrote:
rev2damoon wrote:
...."the ILX offers the ability to pick a conventional gasoline option, a performance version and a hybrid all in a sensible and stylish 4-door package."
What performance version of the ILX are they referring to? The 2.4? LOL. Riiiiiight.
|
Yes, the 2.4 ILX is a performance version. You can get it in a 6 speed, and it does have significantly more performance than the other two models. It may not have the pace of some BMWs or whatever, but Honda can call it a performance model if they wish. So it doesn't meet your criteria for a performance model? Fine, point noted, now move on - nothing of interest for you to see here :)
|
|
rev2damoon
|
|
sadlerau wrote:
rev2damoon wrote:
...."the ILX offers the ability to pick a conventional gasoline option, a performance version and a hybrid all in a sensible and stylish 4-door package."
What performance version of the ILX are they referring to? The 2.4? LOL. Riiiiiight.
|
Yes, the 2.4 ILX is a performance version. You can get it in a 6 speed, and it does have significantly more performance than the other two models. It may not have the pace of some BMWs or whatever, but Honda can call it a performance model if they wish. So it doesn't meet your criteria for a performance model? Fine, point noted, now move on - nothing of interest for you to see here :)
|
LOL. You're a funny one. "They can call it one if they wish?" Really? No sh!t there buddy. Thank you for pointing that out, "Captain Obvious". Yes, they CAN call it one if they wish. They can call it one til the cows come home, but it ain't going to make it so. A friggin' _performance_ Acura that cannot out perform my 8th gen Si in this day and age? Are you KIDDING me?
..And don't you dare presume to tell me to "move on". I will continue to call Honda/Acura on their BS, using TOV as a platform to do so, until such time as Jeff or Shawn or some other TOV administrator tells me I can no longer do it. Can't stomach negative feedback on Acura? Tough sh!t. Better grow some thicker skin, because it's not going away unless Acura MAKES it go away through their product offerings.
Below is an accurate discription of Honda as it stands today.
"And cars like the current TSX will be relegated to the Honda museum – a place that, not coincidentally, also seems to be where Honda now keeps its soul."
:-)
|
RocketRon
|
|
http://www.autoguide.com/manufacturer/honda/2009-honda-civic-si-1130.html
Conclusion:
"The level of driving enjoyment that the Civic Si delivers is just unmatched for the price. It’s not just good, it’s really, really good."
"And on top of all that it’s comfortable, functional, safe and reasonably good on gas. Even with all the new models I’ve driven in the past year, for daily use I’d take a five-year-old Civic Si over almost any of them."
Sorry, I couldn't resist
|
sadlerau
|
|
rev2damoon wrote:
..And don't you dare presume to tell me to "move on". I will continue to call Honda/Acura on their BS, using TOV as a platform to do so, until such time as Jeff or Shawn or some other TOV administrator tells me I can no longer do it. Can't stomach negative feedback on Acura? Tough sh!t. Better grow some thicker skin, because it's not going away unless Acura MAKES it go away through their product offerings.
:-)
|
We are touchy aren't we. The "move on" was figurative, not literal :( Not that I would expect you to notice, but I have also panned Honda/Acura from time to time. I just don't agree your premise that the IXL cannot have a "performance version". It may not meet your expectations of performance, but that is by the by. Notice they didn't call it sporty, or a sports sedan, at least not yet :)
Be that as it may, I too wish for sportier Hondas and Acuras.
|
rev2damoon
|
|
sadlerau wrote:
rev2damoon wrote:
..And don't you dare presume to tell me to "move on". I will continue to call Honda/Acura on their BS, using TOV as a platform to do so, until such time as Jeff or Shawn or some other TOV administrator tells me I can no longer do it. Can't stomach negative feedback on Acura? Tough sh!t. Better grow some thicker skin, because it's not going away unless Acura MAKES it go away through their product offerings.
:-)
|
We are touchy aren't we. The "move on" was figurative, not literal :( Not that I would expect you to notice, but I have also panned Honda/Acura from time to time. I just don't agree your premise that the IXL cannot have a "performance version". It may not meet your expectations of performance, but that is by the by. Notice they didn't call it sporty, or a sports sedan, at least not yet :)
Be that as it may, I too wish for sportier Hondas and Acuras.
|
Well, we agree on that much. The 2.4 ILX is NOT "performance" as far as I'm concerned. I guess we'll just disagree on that and call it a day.
|
luder715
|
|
|
ILX 2.4 is not a performance version, simply because the even the current Si is more of a performance of this platform. ILX weighs more, has a foot larger turning radius, and the biggest factor is NO LIMITED SLIP DIFFERENTIAL. So 7 grand more I get a better looking car but handles and has the same performance as the Si that I can't with Navi. This is worse the when the 8th civic and the RSX type S were being offered at the same time because the RSX was about 2K more the the Si but also lacked the Limited Slip Differental but had about 10 hp more the the Si.
|
luder715
|
|
|
ILX 2.4 is not a performance version, simply because the even the current Si is more of a performance of this platform. ILX weighs more, has a foot larger turning radius, and the biggest factor is NO LIMITED SLIP DIFFERENTIAL. So 7 grand more I get a better looking car but handles worse and has the same performance as the Si that I can't with Navi. This is worse the when the 8th civic and the RSX type S were being offered at the same time because the RSX was about 2K more the the Si but also lacked the Limited Slip Differental but had about 10 hp more the the Si.
|
luder715
|
|
|
Honestly it would make more sense to make different trim levels of the Si, like the GTI or WRX. Have the base with the suede like cloth, available moonroof, basic sound system. Then have a Si premium with leather, moonroof, heated seats power seats, a better sound system, HIDs, automatic climate control, and other ILX type features.
|
Phil17
|
|
|
i've seen several reviews stating that the ILX is quiet :) quite refreshing to hear that. lol
|
gogzy
|
|
|
I just don't understand why... why doesn't Honda fit the LSD on ILX ?
|
loveturtle
|
|
It's sad to say but it seems like Honda management has determined that people "don't care" about driving dynamics anymore and are focused on other things.
I say that's BS. Remember when there was some news about how a percentage of BMW drivers didn't know if their cars were RWD or FWD? I think they use things like that to say "Well people don't care about dynamics anymore" but that's nonsense. Just because they're unaware of the mechanics doesn't mean they don't notice their car just "feels" nicer for some undetermined reason. Honda can say "most buyers don't know what an LSD is" and that's fine.. That doesn't mean they don't notice their car feels nicer under certain circumstances and can't put their finger on why.
|
Torque
|
|
loveturtle wrote:
It's sad to say but it seems like Honda management has determined that people "don't care" about driving dynamics anymore and are focused on other things.
I say that's BS. Remember when there was some news about how a percentage of BMW drivers didn't know if their cars were RWD or FWD? I think they use things like that to say "Well people don't care about dynamics anymore" but that's nonsense. Just because they're unaware of the mechanics doesn't mean they don't notice their car just "feels" nicer for some undetermined reason. Honda can say "most buyers don't know what an LSD is" and that's fine.. That doesn't mean they don't notice their car feels nicer under certain circumstances and can't put their finger on why.
|
And the truth of the matter is that that survey was only to prospective 1 series customers, hardly the bread and butter customers that pay for and get higher performance and more option laden cars. As soon as that survey came out, people jumped on it and automatically assigned the stereotype to just about every single BMW customer as not knowing which wheels drive the car. Talk about mountain from a molehill.
Acura may be quickly trying to distance itself from performance and dynamics (except for the NSX) for the sake of efficiency and being green but take a look at BMW, they are on target to reach their 2 million sales goal 4 years ahead of schedule and they are not turning their back on performance.
|
luder715
|
|
Torque wrote:
loveturtle wrote:
It's sad to say but it seems like Honda management has determined that people "don't care" about driving dynamics anymore and are focused on other things.
I say that's BS. Remember when there was some news about how a percentage of BMW drivers didn't know if their cars were RWD or FWD? I think they use things like that to say "Well people don't care about dynamics anymore" but that's nonsense. Just because they're unaware of the mechanics doesn't mean they don't notice their car just "feels" nicer for some undetermined reason. Honda can say "most buyers don't know what an LSD is" and that's fine.. That doesn't mean they don't notice their car feels nicer under certain circumstances and can't put their finger on why.
|
And the truth of the matter is that that survey was only to prospective 1 series customers, hardly the bread and butter customers that pay for and get higher performance and more option laden cars. As soon as that survey came out, people jumped on it and automatically assigned the stereotype to just about every single BMW customer as not knowing which wheels drive the car. Talk about mountain from a molehill.
Acura may be quickly trying to distance itself from performance and dynamics (except for the NSX) for the sake of efficiency and being green but take a look at BMW, they are on target to reach their 2 million sales goal 4 years ahead of schedule and they are not turning their back on performance.
|
I don't understand Honda's insistence Green Technology without performance, look at the Hybrid flops it started with the Accord Hybrid, followed by the Second Gen Insight, and CR-Z. If the New BMW 328 with a 1-4 with 2 turbos can get 36mpg why can't Honda do something similar. I know the answer Honda hates turbos and Superchargers.
|
MasterOfDaDomain
|
|
TSX69 wrote:
AutoGuide
So why buy the ILX 2.4L? There is one reason, but it doesn’t exist yet.
Acura will reportedly move the TSX further up-market and based on the brand’s new strategy (as we’ve seen with the 2013 RDX) is all-but certain to mix more water into the proverbial orange drink. By comparison to that car, the ILX will then look like a good sporting option. And cars like the current TSX will be relegated to the Honda museum – a place that, not coincidentally, also seems to be where Honda now keeps its soul.
Until your options are limited to the car dealership equivalent of Sophie’s Choice, the ILX 2.4-liter is a car that’s worse than redundant, it’s irrelevant.
|
Ouch!
I guess the current TSX suddenly looks quite good in comparison, and of course the previous TSX was even better. That follows some type of a recent trend within Honda/Acura.
|
P54
|
|
luder715 wrote:
| I don't understand Honda's insistence Green Technology without performance, look at the Hybrid flops it started with the Accord Hybrid, followed by the Second Gen Insight, and CR-Z. If the New BMW 328 with a 1-4 with 2 turbos can get 36mpg why can't Honda do something similar. I know the answer Honda hates turbos and Superchargers. |
Did you know that EPA forced BMW to lower the number for the eight speed to 23/33 mpg?
The Accord hybrid was the fastest Accord you could get. It was a performance oriented hybrid. A flop? Yes, because it was ahead of its time, gas was too cheap back then.
|
auto_enthu
|
|
P54 wrote:
luder715 wrote:
| I don't understand Honda's insistence Green Technology without performance, look at the Hybrid flops it started with the Accord Hybrid, followed by the Second Gen Insight, and CR-Z. If the New BMW 328 with a 1-4 with 2 turbos can get 36mpg why can't Honda do something similar. I know the answer Honda hates turbos and Superchargers. |
Did you know that EPA forced BMW to lower the number for the eight speed to 23/33 mpg?
The Accord hybrid was the fastest Accord you could get. It was a performance oriented hybrid. A flop? Yes, because it was ahead of its time, gas was too cheap back then.
|
Adding to that... turbo engines' real-world MPGs almost never match EPA estimates. Turbos are great for performance and fancy EPA numbers, but not good for MPG in real-world.
|
Gumbercules
|
|
luder715 wrote:
I don't understand Honda's insistence Green Technology without performance, look at the Hybrid flops it started with the Accord Hybrid, followed by the Second Gen Insight, and CR-Z. If the New BMW 328 with a 1-4 with 2 turbos can get 36mpg why can't Honda do something similar. I know the answer Honda hates turbos and Superchargers.
|
You also dont understand that the 36mpg (pre-revised) figure was for HWY ONLY, which is a useless number by itself since every ICE engine consumes less at steady highway speeds than stop and go city traffic.
It's like estimating your annual home energy cost using only summer month rates and completely ignoring that winter months use a lot more energy for heating. In the northeast it costs me about ~$50 in energy (gas and electricity) and winter about $100 to $150, so just using the best rate is useless to me.
I love the Twin Turbo BWM 3.5 liter engines as much as anyone, my buddy's 135 does 60mph to 100mph in the blink of an eye with little effort. But I can guarantee that there is no chance in hell that engine will get 30mpg in average consumption.
Here is what the "flops" are getting:
CR-Z: http://www.fuelly.com/car/honda/cr-z
~39mpg
Insight: http://www.fuelly.com/car/honda/insight 43+mpg
Here is what some "40mpg" cars are actually getting (averaged over hundreds of owners over hundreds of thousands of miles):
2012 Focus: http://www.fuelly.com/car/ford/focus ~31mpg
2012 Elantra: http://www.fuelly.com/car/hyundai/elantra ~30 (actually 29.8)
2012 Civic: http://www.fuelly.com/car/honda/civic ~34mpg
2012 Mazda 3: http://www.fuelly.com/car/mazda/3 ~31mpg
|
Gumbercules
|
|
Also, just for kicks, here is a few BMW owner reported MPG (data is thinner for these, but something tells me its pretty darn close):
2011 328i: http://www.fuelly.com/car/bmw/328i 21.8mpg
335i: http://www.fuelly.com/car/bmw/335i (data too small, but all years are low 20's)
2011 335d: http://www.fuelly.com/car/bmw/335d 31.0mpg, great mileage but still nowhere near the hybrids.
Not saying hybrids are the best and everyone should get one, but please dont get caught up on the HWY ONLY propaganda.
|
DrWhiner
|
|
Torque wrote:
loveturtle wrote:
It's sad to say but it seems like Honda management has determined that people "don't care" about driving dynamics anymore and are focused on other things.
I say that's BS. Remember when there was some news about how a percentage of BMW drivers didn't know if their cars were RWD or FWD? I think they use things like that to say "Well people don't care about dynamics anymore" but that's nonsense. Just because they're unaware of the mechanics doesn't mean they don't notice their car just "feels" nicer for some undetermined reason. Honda can say "most buyers don't know what an LSD is" and that's fine.. That doesn't mean they don't notice their car feels nicer under certain circumstances and can't put their finger on why.
|
And the truth of the matter is that that survey was only to prospective 1 series customers, hardly the bread and butter customers that pay for and get higher performance and more option laden cars. As soon as that survey came out, people jumped on it and automatically assigned the stereotype to just about every single BMW customer as not knowing which wheels drive the car. Talk about mountain from a molehill.
Acura may be quickly trying to distance itself from performance and dynamics (except for the NSX) for the sake of efficiency and being green but take a look at BMW, they are on target to reach their 2 million sales goal 4 years ahead of schedule and they are not turning their back on performance.
|
May be not only cars can become unreliable, memory can also fade.
Read this: http://www.bmwblog.com/2010/03/24/bmw-survery-reveals-1-series-owners-think-its-fwd/
|
DrWhiner
|
|
luder715 wrote:
ILX 2.4 is not a performance version, simply because the even the current Si is more of a performance of this platform. ILX weighs more, has a foot larger turning radius, and the biggest factor is NO LIMITED SLIP DIFFERENTIAL. So 7 grand more I get a better looking car but handles worse and has the same performance as the Si that I can't with Navi. This is worse the when the 8th civic and the RSX type S were being offered at the same time because the RSX was about 2K more the the Si but also lacked the Limited Slip Differental but had about 10 hp more the the Si.
|
Fading memories ?
IIRC, if you are talking the 2006 MY (the year Si debut with a 2.0L , the RSX actually has 201 hp ( SAE net) only, not 210 in 2005 MY.)
|
DrWhiner
|
|
|
P.S. And many would agree the K20Z3 in Si is actually better.
|
TSX69
|
|
Cars.com
A little more consistency would help, as would some color, especially when the ILX is up against the Verano. With the exception of the optional ivory-colored seats and select surfaces in our 2.0 test car, this Acura is characteristically black and gray.
My day of driving ILXes ended with an interstate trip back to Cars.com with the 2.0 for further evaluation, and the seats proved comfortable even after five hours of highway driving. Did Acura produce a better Civic? Of course. But is the $25,900 ILX better than the $22,585 Verano or other competitors? I'm skeptical, but I and the other editors will scrutinize this volume model and publish a full review in the near future.
|
TSX69
|
|
DailyTech
As for the hybrid, I have warmer feelings about it, and feel that it could be somewhat of a winner. I always thought the luxury market makes the best sense for hybrids, given the small premium. Mass-market hybrids that aren't named "Prius" have struggled. The luxury segment may prove a much more natural sales fit, given that the small cost impact is more easily absorbed in a higher sticker (of course some evidence points to the contrary).
The 2013 Acura ILX hybrid trades blows with the Lexus CT 200h in power. It also
handles much better than the third generation Prius I drove, so I would expect it to handle better than the Lexus CT 200h. I also personally vastly prefer the styling of the Acura to the more bloated, bulbous Prius-like look of the Lexus.
Are these advantages enough offset the ~2 mpg lead the Lexus holds? Well, it depends. If all you care about is mpg, you should be buying a Prius anyway. But for the luxury buyer who cares about both mpg and looks, the Acura ILX hybrid at least doesn’t look like it stepped off the set of a sci-fi movie.
When it comes to entry-level, compact luxury sedans, the ILX doesn’t really make a strong case for itself, especially when compared to new competitors like the Buick Verano or even the existing Acura TSX. But the hybrid model is a worthy addition to the Acura lineup and a valiant competitor to Lexus’ CT 200h.
|
luder715
|
|
|
it was advertised in 2005-2006 with 210hp were as the 2002-2004 was advertised at 200 for the Type S model. The Civic Si was advertised in 2006 with 200 then dropped to 197HP do to the new (SAE) ratings I have don't what the ratings in the RSX Type S would be because it was gone before the ratings changed.
|
typer_801
|
|
05-06 RSX Type S on SAE J1349 standards is 201hp and 140 ft-lbs. of torque. That's a difference of 9hp and 3 ft-lbs of torque from the original 210 & 143 Acura published.
Head to head the 2005-6 RSX-S has 4 hp and 1 ft-lb of torque more than the Si.
luder715 wrote:
it was advertised in 2005-2006 with 210hp were as the 2002-2004 was advertised at 200 for the Type S model. The Civic Si was advertised in 2006 with 200 then dropped to 197HP do to the new (SAE) ratings I have don't what the ratings in the RSX Type S would be because it was gone before the ratings changed.
|
|
NealX
|
|
Autoblog's First Drive has posted:
2013 Acura ILX: Faint Praise For The World's Nicest Honda Civic
|
Powered by Honda
|
|
They hated it!
|
typer_801
|
|
Final three paragraphs say all you need to hear.
We, on the other hand, do think Acura is charging too much for the 2013 ILX. The car itself, while not terribly exciting to drive, is a pretty nice way to get from point A to point B, but so is the Buick Verano, which, with a starting price of $23,470, is several thousand dollars cheaper. If you want a sportier option, we suggest you wait for the upcoming turbocharged Verano that will be available with a six-speed manual – we predict that car will come pretty well equipped for about the same price as the ILX 2.4, except that it will have navigation, a big LCD screen in the dash and considerably more than the ILX's maximum of 201 horsepower.
If you don't care about driving a car wearing a "premium" badge, the Ford Focus Titanium can be had with all the goodies you can get in an ILX – plus a bunch of technology, such as Active Park Assist, that you can't get at all in the Acura – for the same price as the base ILX. And if you do care about having that badge (and the expected reliability and high resale value that goes along with it), the larger and more entertaining TSX sedan can be had for $30,010 – and it includes the bigger 2.4-liter engine and leather as standard equipment.
Acura hopes to find 35,000 buyers for the ILX sedan per year, and they very well may hit that figure. If you're in the market for an entry-level vehicle from a premium automaker, by all means have a look at the ILX... just be sure to check out its competition before signing on the dotted line. As much as we'd like to tell you that the ILX heralds a return to Acura's roots – innovation, value and technology – we can't, because it simply doesn't.
Powered by Honda wrote:
They hated it!
|
|
TonyEX
|
|
I seriously doubt that the Buick Verano and Ford Focus are in the same shopping list of someone looking at an ILX.
The Buick is very boring looking car, with an overstyled dash and a tight interior. I honestly don't know who they are marketing the car to? It's like they want to sell you a big car that is not big?
The Ford, OTOH, is edgy. It's the exact opposite of the Buick. Again, I can see that someone looking at the Ford Focus might be looking at a Civic Si... and likely someone who's more enamored of the in dash gizmos than the underpinnings.
The back seat of both cars, Ford and Buick, look smaller than the back seat of my Civic sedan. And, the ILX is supposed to be a little bit larger than the Civic, hence I think the ILX is a more useful sedan.
I think the logic of this comparison fails because they push up strawmen cars are arguments... It's like saying the BMW is overpriced... everyone knows that.
This type of lame comparison is being invited by Acura's marketing team because they are not trying hard.
Again, the ILX should be pushed as a powerful and economical small luxury car. The R20 is likely all the engine most folks need, but there MUST be top dogs
K24/AT6SS/SH-AWD ILX-S (200bhp)
K22/MT6/SH-AWD ILX-S (230 bhp)
Price them at 35K and shove them out the journalists to salivate for. ( Please reserve one MT for me...)
Put the Halo ILX-S against the 3 series Bimmer and then you won't see this kind of hogwash, milquetoast reviews.
|
NealX
|
|
I have to say that I would not consider the ILX interior "more useful" than the Civic's, as Jeff was not able to sit in the rear comfortably (without his head against the headliner - I think he'd need an additional 1.5-2" to clear it). The hump of the center cushion would certainly not allow 3 average adults to seat.
One benefit of the added width (vs. reduced height) was the added leg-spread room.
And the shape of the trunk pass-through (a flattened hexagon) was such that after one folds down the single-piece rear seat back, there's little added utility/volume to put to use. The chassis reinforce is pretty substantial.
While the glovebox was surprisingly voluminous, to get the full effect drop-down means your passenger get a knock in the knees.
Just sharin' what I know first-hand, my brother...
|
|
|
| |
|
| Thread Page - 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 |
| |
|
![[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}
