[home][rumors and news][model release matrix][dealer network][desktop calendar][exhaust notes][tov forums][links][search][sponsors][garage][login]

Tire Rack Upgrade Garage
 Search for a Dealer:
 Canadian Flag US Flag
 Honda Acura
 ZIP  
BBC: Honda set to close Swindon factory in 2022
More.......................
Nikkei: Honda enters agreement with CATL for battery supply contract through 2027
More.......................
Acura Marks 30 Years Since Debut of Iconic NSX Supercar
More.......................
American Honda reports January sales
More.......................
Acura Marks 15th Anniversary of Super Handling All-Wheel Drive™
More.......................
Honda releases pricing and EPA information for 2019 Passport
More.......................
American Honda Reports December Sales
More.......................
American Honda Reports November Sales
More.......................
General Talk --> Re: Said Goodbye to the MDX Today
Join Discussion......
General Talk --> Re: Honda Loses a $38 Million Liability Lawsuit
Join Discussion......
Professional Motorsports --> Re: F1 - 2019 Pre-Season Testing - Days 1-4
Join Discussion......
General Talk --> Facts about HMA - 60 years of AHM - 50 years of CB750
Join Discussion......
Audio & Electronics --> Re: Lynyrd Skynyrd
Join Discussion......
General Talk --> Re: 2020 Honda Fit Render
Join Discussion......
Today's Reading Links --> Re: Swindon in peril
Join Discussion......
General Talk --> Z6 head studs
Join Discussion......
Today's Reading Links --> Kandi EV Approved for US
Join Discussion......
Type R --> Re: DC-R
Join Discussion......
General Talk --> Re: Timid AHM marketing
Join Discussion......
Today's Reading Links --> Re: Poor reliability scores for Honda and Acura
Join Discussion......
TOV Asia --> Re: Honda JP Sales 2018: Hybrids make up 55% of reg. cars
Join Discussion......
General Talk --> Re: Honda's new sub-brand Honda e
Join Discussion......
Amateur Racing & Driving --> Re: My first helmet !
Join Discussion......
2019 Honda Passport PR Photo Gallery
Read Article....................
2019 Acura NSX PR Photo Gallery
Read Article....................
First Drive: 2019 Acura ILX
Read Article....................
2019 Acura ILX PR Photo Gallery
Read Article....................
First Drive: 2019 Honda Pilot
Read Article....................
2019 Honda Pilot PR Photo Gallery
Read Article....................

[fancy] [flat] [simple]
TOV Forums > TLX > > Re: FR platform for the TLX

Go to:

Viewing Threshold (What is this?)

Thread Page - [1]
Author
  Post New Thread
RAV
Profile for RAV
FR platform for the TLX    (Score: 1, Normal) 01-22-2019 09:59
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
When you consider Acura will now be using exclusive platforms and the V6T why would they not go with a longitudinal engne layout. The only other major adjustment they would have to make is to the transmissions. If they used a version of the DSG in the NSX that is already longitudinal. It obvious that car would handle better but their designs would improve from no long front overhang. Any ideas?
NSXman
Profile for NSXman
Re: FR platform for the TLX    (Score: 1, Normal) 01-22-2019 10:18
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
Does exclusive platforms means no tie whatsoever to existing platforms? Didn't Honda call the Ridgeline a "mission specific platform", even though it has roots in more mainstream Hondas?

Acura used to sell the FWD/longitudinal RL and Legend. I'd think if they did anything radical that'd be the direction they'd go.

TR
Profile for TR
Re: FR platform for the TLX    (Score: 1, Normal) 01-22-2019 10:51
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
Pretty clear to me. It's not as "exclusive" as Honda wants you to think.
lexusgs
Profile for lexusgs
Re: FR platform for the TLX    (Score: 1, Normal) 01-22-2019 11:05
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
It's not "exclusive", they are just calling it "exclusive" to try to divert attention away that it is not a premium RWD platform, it is still heavily related to the Accord platform which is why it is still a family sedan FWD transv mount.
typer_801
Profile for typer_801
Re: FR platform for the TLX    (Score: 1, Normal) 01-22-2019 11:12
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
Agreed....I think minor changes count as 'exclusive' and don't think Acura is ready to pony-up the $M's to develop a truly unique plank.

I'll pose a partnership option that's quite out there....

I think Acura should consider a partnership with Genesis (Hyundai). They've got some great RWD planks (i.e. G70) that would spread development cost across two brands that IMO can't afford cars with such low sales volumes. I know this is a crazy suggestion and Honda likely will never, ever do it, but seems like the only way they'll ever deliver an Acura FR sedan.

Would hope too, in this situation, each brand would use their own powertrain, but simply share the chassis.

Might be a way to fund/justify building a small sports car too if they could platform share it (Honda leading that development).

The world of automotive consolidation is here, I think Honda needs to start embracing it a little more.

TR wrote:
Pretty clear to me. It's not as "exclusive" as Honda wants you to think.


Pauly123
Profile for Pauly123
Re: FR platform for the TLX    (Score: 1, Normal) 01-22-2019 11:26
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
Agreed. Honda has a tendency to exaggerate... I think they uses the phrase "high revving" in some publication to describe the motor in the new Civic. I guess everything is subjective but I wouldn't exactly call 6,500 rpm high revving.
MSZ
Profile for MSZ
Re: FR platform for the TLX    (Score: 1, Normal) 01-22-2019 11:34
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
That's actually a good idea about the Korean partnership.

Before Kia became part of the Hyundai group, they had some rebadged Mazdas and Hondas(namely 2nd gen Legend) So if Honda team up with those guys again it would be great.

TR
Profile for TR
Re: FR platform for the TLX    (Score: 1, Normal) 01-22-2019 12:12
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
typer_801 wrote:
Agreed....I think minor changes count as 'exclusive' and don't think Acura is ready to pony-up the $M's to develop a truly unique plank.

I'll pose a partnership option that's quite out there....

I think Acura should consider a partnership with Genesis (Hyundai). They've got some great RWD planks (i.e. G70) that would spread development cost across two brands that IMO can't afford cars with such low sales volumes. I know this is a crazy suggestion and Honda likely will never, ever do it, but seems like the only way they'll ever deliver an Acura FR sedan.

Would hope too, in this situation, each brand would use their own powertrain, but simply share the chassis.

Might be a way to fund/justify building a small sports car too if they could platform share it (Honda leading that development).

The world of automotive consolidation is here, I think Honda needs to start embracing it a little more.

TR wrote:
Pretty clear to me. It's not as "exclusive" as Honda wants you to think.




But they already invested a ton of money (most likely literally) into NSX 2.0 v1, didn't they? Around the same time we saw spy shots of sedan mule with RWD proportions.
My point is, it's not about development cost. I have no idea what it is, but the development cost makes no sense to me. This topic has been beaten to death though.

lexusgs
Profile for lexusgs
Re: FR platform for the TLX    (Score: 1, Normal) 01-22-2019 17:02
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
TR wrote:
typer_801 wrote:
Agreed....I think minor changes count as 'exclusive' and don't think Acura is ready to pony-up the $M's to develop a truly unique plank.

I'll pose a partnership option that's quite out there....

I think Acura should consider a partnership with Genesis (Hyundai). They've got some great RWD planks (i.e. G70) that would spread development cost across two brands that IMO can't afford cars with such low sales volumes. I know this is a crazy suggestion and Honda likely will never, ever do it, but seems like the only way they'll ever deliver an Acura FR sedan.

Would hope too, in this situation, each brand would use their own powertrain, but simply share the chassis.

Might be a way to fund/justify building a small sports car too if they could platform share it (Honda leading that development).

The world of automotive consolidation is here, I think Honda needs to start embracing it a little more.

TR wrote:
Pretty clear to me. It's not as "exclusive" as Honda wants you to think.




But they already invested a ton of money (most likely literally) into NSX 2.0 v1, didn't they? Around the same time we saw spy shots of sedan mule with RWD proportions.
My point is, it's not about development cost. I have no idea what it is, but the development cost makes no sense to me. This topic has been beaten to death though.


It has more to do with Honda just being stubborn and totally clueless about the luxury/performance market. There are too many in the leadership that does not like Acura, the idea of Acura, and wants to give it any effort or money over being Honda+.

You are right, it is not the money, Honda has wasted a ton of money on half hassed failed Acura products, half assed failed Honda products, that stupid robot, researching and developing 8, 10 cylinders, RWD platforms, single platform/engine vehicles like the NSX and S2000. With the economic collapse in 2009 people at Honda found the perfect excuse to kill off the Tier 1 products certain leadership never wanted to do and they could care less how much money they already wasted on development or how much it harmed the Acura brand because they have so much disdain for the Acura brand and luxury/performance cars/market.

silverf16
Profile for silverf16
Re: FR platform for the TLX    (Score: 1, Normal) 01-22-2019 19:08
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
The proposal to use a Korean plank for Honda would get quite a chuckle out of the Japanese. Sounds like a plausible idea. Note that Koreans get their plank from old German platforms and the Japanese would not sucummb to using a plank from the Koreans.

But the idea is duly noted. Honda has worked with GM for technology sharing and development. But if Honda really wanted FR plank, they would have used what was already developed. The problem is there is no solid leadership at top to take the board of directors by the horn. Instead we have a revolving door of CEOs who like to play it safe and change their minds with platform decisions hence we have tier 1 idea that came and went, Prior gen Cheap civic, s2000 replacement cancelled, DNX, HSC, HSV, NSX2 without turbo using transverse layout before the NC1 NSX arrived, which is a dud. Honda is as disfunctional as Congress in certain segments.

Whats the solution? Resurrect Soichiro.

Midi_Amp
Profile for Midi_Amp
Re: FR platform for the TLX    (Score: 1, Normal) 01-22-2019 21:00
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
RAV wrote:
When you consider Acura will now be using exclusive platforms and the V6T why would they not go with a longitudinal engne layout. The only other major adjustment they would have to make is to the transmissions. If they used a version of the DSG in the NSX that is already longitudinal. It obvious that car would handle better but their designs would improve from no long front overhang. Any ideas?

It's a marketing gimmick. Just like RDX "exclusive platform" which actually a modified CR-V, TLX platform most likely an Accord with heavily revised front and rear subframe to support SH-AWD. I don't have exactly a problem with that since Honda proves their engineers can whip up a good car on these so called "compromised" FWD platform. The front overhang thing is already a moot discussion as of now. Volvo can design their current cars with long dash to axle ratio and rear wheel drive proportion although their cars are FWD based. If Volvo can do it, Honda can do it too... It's only a matter whether the bean counters allows it or not.


Fitdad
Profile for Fitdad
Re: FR platform for the TLX    (Score: 1, Normal) 01-22-2019 23:07
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
It's somewhat unknowable exactly what the differences between the CR-V and RDX "platforms" are - Acura tells us stuff obviously - but that kind of stuff is usually for marketing purposes.

There are definite differences - to me what makes whatever they're doing now different is that they've promised more vehicles on the same "platform". I don't know that Acura has ever really done that before. The MDX was a modified Pilot, the RDX was a CR-V, the TLX was an Accord, the RSX was a Civic...that kind of thing.

So...different vehicles have different needs and benchmarks. Automakers have sort of sold us on the idea that modern platforms are VERY flexible - however I'm pretty sure no major automaker uses one platform for all it's vehicles. Audi probably comes closest but they have MQB and MLB vehicles. Even Volvo - they designed the all-new SPA platform....but then they also designed the CMA platform for smaller vehicles. Because different sizes of vehicles and performance targets have different needs.

I guess my point is that vehicles can have the engine pointing the same way but have a completely different platform. The aforementioned Civic and Accord used to have different platforms for instance.

Another thing I read somewhere was that it took Acura like...4 years to figure out how to produce the CR-V and RDX on the same line at East Liberty.

https://www.dispatch.com/business/20180515/acuras-redesigned-sporty-rdx-now-rolling-out-of-east-liberty-plant

I mean the obvious thing to say is that you wouldn't think it would be so hard to figure out how to make these two vehicles on the same line if they were on the same "platform". That's kind of the whole defining characteristic of a platform in some ways: the factory can add a variant without a ton of hassle and changes because everything has the same hard points and is put together the same way.

I would love a long layout Acura btw. And I will say that if Acura is ever going to get one this is sort of how it could start - Acura has to show the ability to take a "platform" and make their lineup with it instead of just taking existing Honda's and turning them into Acuras. And Honda has to see the financial and critical benefits of that. Having the TLX, RLX, RDX and MDX on the same platform (if that is indeed the plan) should create both a more consistent product and create more cost savings among the vehicles themselves.

So then maybe for the next go round of FMCs they'll really do it right. But who knows.

owequitit
Profile for owequitit
Re: FR platform for the TLX    (Score: 1, Normal) 01-23-2019 00:32
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
Pauly123 wrote:
Agreed. Honda has a tendency to exaggerate... I think they uses the phrase "high revving" in some publication to describe the motor in the new Civic. I guess everything is subjective but I wouldn't exactly call 6,500 rpm high revving.


These are all specific marketing examples of trying to polish a turd. Honda is basically trying to coast on their reputation, hoping that nobody will notice it isn't true.

Fan Koni
Profile for Fan Koni
Re: FR platform for the TLX    (Score: 1, Normal) 01-23-2019 05:44
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
They should work with Tata to get the Jaguar XE plank.
They're selling some 50k p.a. Globally which is a shame because it's really nice.

Honda could combine production in the UK in Swindon.
So Jaguar has the space on their lines for their hot selling SUV.
They can ship the engines the 2.0T and new 3.0T from NA, just like the CTR.

longhorn
Profile for longhorn
Re: FR platform for the TLX    (Score: 1, Normal) 01-23-2019 09:34
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
Wasn't there some talk of car manufacturers creating a plank for FWD or RWD powertrains? One plank for most of a product lineup.
lexusgs
Profile for lexusgs
Re: FR platform for the TLX    (Score: 1, Normal) 01-23-2019 23:31
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
longhorn wrote:
Wasn't there some talk of car manufacturers creating a plank for FWD or RWD powertrains? One plank for most of a product lineup.

Its always just talk with Honda when it comes to a RWD premium platform for Acura.

Midi_Amp
Profile for Midi_Amp
Re: FR platform for the TLX    (Score: 1, Normal) 01-24-2019 05:09
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
longhorn wrote:
Wasn't there some talk of car manufacturers creating a plank for FWD or RWD powertrains? One plank for most of a product lineup.

There's no such thing... I think. VW group MQB and MLB platform are both catered to different engine orientation, the MQB for transverse and MLB for longitudinal engine.

The issue of having just one plank is that you won't have FWD packaging benefit for mainstream cars where people wants more interior room.

I forgot where I read it, but all the move to SUVs are also a technical one. With SUV tall stature, it allows for them to be modified later easily with battery under the floor. Since SUVs tall stature, dash to axle ratio isn't so much of a fuss anymore since visually FWD based SUVs looks well proportioned because they are... Fat. Everybody and their grandmother criticized TLX, RLX, ILX proportion. A few complaints the same dash to axle ratio on MDX, RDX.

Nick GravesX
Profile for Nick GravesX
Re: FR platform for the TLX    (Score: 1, Normal) 01-24-2019 05:30
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
Midi_Amp wrote:
longhorn wrote:
Wasn't there some talk of car manufacturers creating a plank for FWD or RWD powertrains? One plank for most of a product lineup.

There's no such thing... I think. VW group MQB and MLB platform are both catered to different engine orientation, the MQB for transverse and MLB for longitudinal engine.

The issue of having just one plank is that you won't have FWD packaging benefit for mainstream cars where people wants more interior room.

I forgot where I read it, but all the move to SUVs are also a technical one. With SUV tall stature, it allows for them to be modified later easily with battery under the floor. Since SUVs tall stature, dash to axle ratio isn't so much of a fuss anymore since visually FWD based SUVs looks well proportioned because they are... Fat. Everybody and their grandmother criticized TLX, RLX, ILX proportion. A few complaints the same dash to axle ratio on MDX, RDX.



Well, Triumph managed it in the 1960s more by accident than design.

But no, it's not really practicable these days. Though Rover & BMW were apparently looking at the idea in the 1990s.

Rumours that MLB is going away persist, too; The A4 will move to MQB and the larger vehicles will all be on MSB.

But a RWD-style plank from Honda really is whipping a horse's skeleton these days.

honduh
Profile for honduh
Re: FR platform for the TLX    (Score: 1, Normal) 01-24-2019 10:47
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
Nick GravesX wrote:
Midi_Amp wrote:
longhorn wrote:
Wasn't there some talk of car manufacturers creating a plank for FWD or RWD powertrains? One plank for most of a product lineup.

There's no such thing... I think. VW group MQB and MLB platform are both catered to different engine orientation, the MQB for transverse and MLB for longitudinal engine.

The issue of having just one plank is that you won't have FWD packaging benefit for mainstream cars where people wants more interior room.

I forgot where I read it, but all the move to SUVs are also a technical one. With SUV tall stature, it allows for them to be modified later easily with battery under the floor. Since SUVs tall stature, dash to axle ratio isn't so much of a fuss anymore since visually FWD based SUVs looks well proportioned because they are... Fat. Everybody and their grandmother criticized TLX, RLX, ILX proportion. A few complaints the same dash to axle ratio on MDX, RDX.



Well, Triumph managed it in the 1960s more by accident than design.

But no, it's not really practicable these days. Though Rover & BMW were apparently looking at the idea in the 1990s.

Rumours that MLB is going away persist, too; The A4 will move to MQB and the larger vehicles will all be on MSB.

But a RWD-style plank from Honda really is whipping a horse's skeleton these days.


In Audi’s case I think the drop in MLB for A4 makes sense, potential styling proportion problems notwithstanding. They’ve always had a fetish with hanging the drive bits far forward and creating a boat anchor. I guess this was justified by making it easier to hook up the full-time Quattro but now that they have the part-time Quattro, why bother...well except for high performance models. But this move should improve handling. If they switch to MQB, I am curious how they will do an RS4/5, it would be quite a handful to manage those power levels.

What’s up with Audi cribbing Acura though...dual screen infotainment and now transverse setup?

Nick GravesX
Profile for Nick GravesX
Re: FR platform for the TLX    (Score: 1, Normal) 01-24-2019 12:44
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
honduh wrote:
Nick GravesX wrote:
Midi_Amp wrote:
longhorn wrote:
Wasn't there some talk of car manufacturers creating a plank for FWD or RWD powertrains? One plank for most of a product lineup.

There's no such thing... I think. VW group MQB and MLB platform are both catered to different engine orientation, the MQB for transverse and MLB for longitudinal engine.

The issue of having just one plank is that you won't have FWD packaging benefit for mainstream cars where people wants more interior room.

I forgot where I read it, but all the move to SUVs are also a technical one. With SUV tall stature, it allows for them to be modified later easily with battery under the floor. Since SUVs tall stature, dash to axle ratio isn't so much of a fuss anymore since visually FWD based SUVs looks well proportioned because they are... Fat. Everybody and their grandmother criticized TLX, RLX, ILX proportion. A few complaints the same dash to axle ratio on MDX, RDX.



Well, Triumph managed it in the 1960s more by accident than design.

But no, it's not really practicable these days. Though Rover & BMW were apparently looking at the idea in the 1990s.

Rumours that MLB is going away persist, too; The A4 will move to MQB and the larger vehicles will all be on MSB.

But a RWD-style plank from Honda really is whipping a horse's skeleton these days.


In Audi’s case I think the drop in MLB for A4 makes sense, potential styling proportion problems notwithstanding. They’ve always had a fetish with hanging the drive bits far forward and creating a boat anchor. I guess this was justified by making it easier to hook up the full-time Quattro but now that they have the part-time Quattro, why bother...well except for high performance models. But this move should improve handling. If they switch to MQB, I am curious how they will do an RS4/5, it would be quite a handful to manage those power levels.

What’s up with Audi cribbing Acura though...dual screen infotainment and now transverse setup?



It would suggest the V6s are going away.


 
Thread Page - [1]
Go to:
Contact TOV | Submit Your Article | Submit Your Link | Advertise | TOV Shop | Events | Our Sponsors | TOV Archives
Copyright © 2018 Velocitech Inc. All information contained herein remains the property of Velocitech Inc.
The Temple of VTEC is not affiliated with American Honda Motor Co., Inc. TOV Policies and Guidelines - Credits - Privacy Policy
30 mobile: 0