Honda Car Forum

Car & Driver just reviewed the new TL A Spec. They gave it only a mediocre
review. However, they also tested the new BMW 545i which is about $30K more
money. The TL went 0 to 60 just 0.1 second slower than the BMW 545i and 0.2
sec slower in the quarter mile. So is the BMW worth the additional $30,000?
You decide ...

- Russ in Santa Barbara

Here's the summaries:

Acura TL A Spec

Vehicle type: front-engine, front-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan
Price as tested: $40,895 (base price: $38,895)
Engine type: SOHC 24-valve V-6, aluminum block and heads, port fuel
injection
Displacement: 196 cu in, 3210cc
Power (SAE net): 270 bhp @ 6200 rpm
Torque (SAE net): 238 lb-ft @ 5000 rpm

Transmission: 6-speed manual
Wheelbase: 107.9 in
Length/width/height: .186.2/72.2/56.7 in
Curb weight: 3543 lb

Zero to 60 mph: 5.6 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 14.5 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 28.4 sec
Street start, 5-60 mph: 6.2 sec
Standing 1/4-mile: 14.3 sec @ 99 mph
Top speed (drag limited): 152 mph
Braking, 70-0 mph: 174 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.90 g
EPA fuel economy, city driving: 19 mpg
C/D-observed fuel economy: 20 mpg

BMW 545i

Vehicle type: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan
Price as tested: $62,620 (base price: $55,695)
Engine type: DOHC 32-valve V-8, aluminum block and heads, port fuel
injection
Displacement: 268 cu in, 4398cc
Power (SAE net): 325 bhp @ 6100 rpm
Torque (SAE net):330 lb-ft @ 3600 rpm
Transmission: 6-speed manual
Wheelbase: 113.7 in
Length/width/height: 190.6/72.7/58.0 in
Curb weight: 4000 lb

Zero to 60 mph: 5.5 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 13.2 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 23.5 sec
Street start, 5-60 mph: 6.0 sec
Standing 1/4-mile: 14.1 sec @ 103 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 150 mph
Braking, 70-0 mph: 156 ft
EPA fuel economy, city driving: 17 mpg
C/D-observed fuel economy: 16 mpg

"RLL" <rlombardo@cox.net> wrote:
> Car & Driver just reviewed the new TL A Spec. They gave it only a mediocre
> review. However, they also tested the new BMW 545i which is about $30K more
> money. The TL went 0 to 60 just 0.1 second slower than the BMW 545i and 0.2
> sec slower in the quarter mile. So is the BMW worth the additional $30,000?
> You decide ...
>
> - Russ in Santa Barbara

For as long as I can remember, the automotive press has been carrying a torch
for certain brands, deeming them superior. BMW, the *gold standard* of sporting
sedans, has certainly benefitted from this practice. Don't get me wrong, I like
BMWs and think they are often wonderful cars.

But the fact remains, the blinders are on. Same seems to be true of Mercedes.
I recall a road test (R&T ?) of about a decade ago. A mid-sized Mercedes,
0-60 maybe 8 secs?
okay brakes
mundane handling, not bad, not great (even for the time period)
styling ... well, how about "lack of styling"
fuel economy - fair at best
price? $50,000+

The author called it "the perfect car". Yes, we might agree that it integrated
all aspects well, and was quite enjoyable to drive, but --- perfect?
The author went on to say that there was basically nothing more to be done.
Ha ha. In my book, perfect would be:
0-60 sub-5 seconds
phenomenal brakes (60-0 100 feet or less)
outstanding handling
drop-dead gorgeous styling
50 mpg
price? $10,000

Is it gonna happen? Of course not. But to call that rather mediocre Mercedes
of the past "perfect", is just as ludicrous.

Really surprising then to read the latest R&T, and see where the BMW 530i
came in 6th out of 7, ahead of only a Volvo S80 T6. Reviewers really dinged
it on styling ("flame-surfacing" courtesy Mr. Bangle) and ergos (the typical
dread I-Drive).
Also rather odd to see no Acura TL in this line-up - inexplicable.

Gee, what would folks in this NG rather have, a Cadillac CTS or the TL?
Oh wait, maybe the BMW has $25K worth of extra "soul". More ha ha.

--
Rick K
asking questions

Rick K wrote:
> "RLL" <rlombardo@cox.net> wrote:
>> Car & Driver just reviewed the new TL A Spec. They gave it only a
>> mediocre review. However, they also tested the new BMW 545i which
>> is about $30K more money. The TL went 0 to 60 just 0.1 second
>> slower than the BMW 545i and 0.2 sec slower in the quarter mile. So
>> is the BMW worth the additional $30,000? You decide ...
>>
>> - Russ in Santa Barbara
>
> For as long as I can remember, the automotive press has been carrying
> a torch for certain brands, deeming them superior. BMW, the *gold
> standard* of sporting sedans, has certainly benefitted from this
> practice. Don't get me wrong, I like BMWs and think they are often
> wonderful cars.
>
> But the fact remains, the blinders are on. Same seems to be true of
> Mercedes. I recall a road test (R&T ?) of about a decade ago. A
> mid-sized Mercedes, 0-60 maybe 8 secs?
> okay brakes
> mundane handling, not bad, not great (even for the time period)
> styling ... well, how about "lack of styling"
> fuel economy - fair at best
> price? $50,000+
>
> The author called it "the perfect car". Yes, we might agree that it
> integrated all aspects well, and was quite enjoyable to drive, but
> --- perfect?
> The author went on to say that there was basically nothing more to be
> done.
> Ha ha. In my book, perfect would be:
> 0-60 sub-5 seconds
> phenomenal brakes (60-0 100 feet or less)
> outstanding handling
> drop-dead gorgeous styling
> 50 mpg
> price? $10,000
>
> Is it gonna happen? Of course not. But to call that rather mediocre
> Mercedes of the past "perfect", is just as ludicrous.
>
> Really surprising then to read the latest R&T, and see where the BMW
> 530i
> came in 6th out of 7, ahead of only a Volvo S80 T6. Reviewers really
> dinged
> it on styling ("flame-surfacing" courtesy Mr. Bangle) and ergos (the
> typical dread I-Drive).
> Also rather odd to see no Acura TL in this line-up - inexplicable.
>
> Gee, what would folks in this NG rather have, a Cadillac CTS or the
> TL?
> Oh wait, maybe the BMW has $25K worth of extra "soul". More ha ha. :-@

On Wed, 19 May 2004 19:44:02 -0700, "RLL" <rlombardo@cox.net> wrote:
>Acura TL A Spec
>Zero to 60 mph: 5.6 sec
>Zero to 100 mph: 14.5 sec
>Zero to 130 mph: 28.4 sec
>Street start, 5-60 mph: 6.2 sec
>Standing 1/4-mile: 14.3 sec @ 99 mph
>Top speed (drag limited): 152 mph
....
>BMW 545i
>Zero to 60 mph: 5.5 sec
>Zero to 100 mph: 13.2 sec
>Zero to 130 mph: 23.5 sec
>Street start, 5-60 mph: 6.0 sec
>Standing 1/4-mile: 14.1 sec @ 103 mph
>Top speed (governor limited): 150 mph

This is very hot performance for driving around town. Amazing what
you can get now, for not all that much money (in the Acura version,
anyway). Beemers aren't what they used to be versus the competition,
and maybe not in absolute reliability (or ergonomic) terms, either,
but the 545i being a V8 and ... oh wait, it's all-aluminium too, hmm?
I was going to say it might be more reliable if run hard every day,
though exactly where do you drive every day, where you can wring out
cars like this to their full capabilities?

J.

On Thu, 20 May 2004 23:50:00 GMT, JXStern <JXSternChangeX2R@gte.net>
wrote:

>anyway). Beemers aren't what they used to be versus the competition,

....But at least they're not front wheel drive. The new TL has
terrible problems getting its power down onto the road under
'spirited' driving conditions - something that a well sorted rear
drive can do with ease. Sure, small front drives like the old Alfas
and Minis were a blast, but anything with serious power? Forget it.

I bought a TSX late last year, but I'm about to trade it for a 2 year
old 540. The TSX is a nice car, but the front drive destroys it. I
tried a new TL and it's even worse. The TSX was my mistake, I went
against my gut feel and I paid for it. Honda needs to get with the
program and go rear wheel drive if they *really* want to run with the
big boys.
--
Dan Drake

On Thu, 20 May 2004 20:11:19 -0400, Dan Drake
<ddrake@NOTTHIS.comcast.net> wrote:
>>anyway). Beemers aren't what they used to be versus the competition,
>
>...But at least they're not front wheel drive. The new TL has
>terrible problems getting its power down onto the road under
>'spirited' driving conditions - something that a well sorted rear
>drive can do with ease. Sure, small front drives like the old Alfas
>and Minis were a blast, but anything with serious power? Forget it.

Did Alfa ever sell a fwd car in the states? My Alfetta had that fine
old deDion rear axle, but it was certainly the *rear* axle.

>I bought a TSX late last year, but I'm about to trade it for a 2 year
>old 540. The TSX is a nice car, but the front drive destroys it. I
>tried a new TL and it's even worse. The TSX was my mistake, I went
>against my gut feel and I paid for it. Honda needs to get with the
>program and go rear wheel drive if they *really* want to run with the
>big boys.

Yes, I think they know that, and it's why they haven't done a V8 yet,
but the new RL will be 4WD, so stay tuned!

The newer Hondas with fwd are amazingly neutral around town, compared
to stuff from twenty years ago, but just the weight distribution puts
a limit on handling. I guess there is the S2000, if you want a
good-handling roller skate.

J.

And don't forget the best exoticar ever built ... The NSX (New Sportscar
eXperimental); mid-engine, RWD

- Russ in Santa Barbara (1997 NSX, 2004 TL)

"JXStern" <JXSternChangeX2R@gte.net> wrote in message
news:jhqqa0hbjim7823vl2ghl2ujr08jlubcj5@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 20 May 2004 20:11:19 -0400, Dan Drake
> <ddrake@NOTTHIS.comcast.net> wrote:
> >>anyway). Beemers aren't what they used to be versus the competition,
> >
> >...But at least they're not front wheel drive. The new TL has
> >terrible problems getting its power down onto the road under
> >'spirited' driving conditions - something that a well sorted rear
> >drive can do with ease. Sure, small front drives like the old Alfas
> >and Minis were a blast, but anything with serious power? Forget it.
>
> Did Alfa ever sell a fwd car in the states? My Alfetta had that fine
> old deDion rear axle, but it was certainly the *rear* axle.
>
> >I bought a TSX late last year, but I'm about to trade it for a 2 year
> >old 540. The TSX is a nice car, but the front drive destroys it. I
> >tried a new TL and it's even worse. The TSX was my mistake, I went
> >against my gut feel and I paid for it. Honda needs to get with the
> >program and go rear wheel drive if they *really* want to run with the
> >big boys.
>
> Yes, I think they know that, and it's why they haven't done a V8 yet,
> but the new RL will be 4WD, so stay tuned!
>
> The newer Hondas with fwd are amazingly neutral around town, compared
> to stuff from twenty years ago, but just the weight distribution puts
> a limit on handling. I guess there is the S2000, if you want a
> good-handling roller skate.
>
> J.
>

ahhh, hence a TL-S should come back.

honda should build a TL-S that is different in TL only by rear drive and
manual trans, the rest can be common.

got my 04 TL yesterday, nice car !!! oh, i'm not wanting to do indy around
town, simply can't. and for head wrenching torque i take my 76' Pontiac TA
out for a spin......




"Dan Drake" <ddrake@NOTTHIS.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:6ehqa0lcjnen22qj45q5e5bhcldo1nf5vf@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 20 May 2004 23:50:00 GMT, JXStern <JXSternChangeX2R@gte.net>
> wrote:
>
> >anyway). Beemers aren't what they used to be versus the competition,
>
> ...But at least they're not front wheel drive. The new TL has
> terrible problems getting its power down onto the road under
> 'spirited' driving conditions - something that a well sorted rear
> drive can do with ease. Sure, small front drives like the old Alfas
> and Minis were a blast, but anything with serious power? Forget it.
>
> I bought a TSX late last year, but I'm about to trade it for a 2 year
> old 540. The TSX is a nice car, but the front drive destroys it. I
> tried a new TL and it's even worse. The TSX was my mistake, I went
> against my gut feel and I paid for it. Honda needs to get with the
> program and go rear wheel drive if they *really* want to run with the
> big boys.
> --
> Dan Drake

On Mon, 24 May 2004 01:21:21 GMT, "Kryptoknight"
<kryptoknight@att.net> wrote:
>ahhh, hence a TL-S should come back.
>
>honda should build a TL-S that is different in TL only by rear drive and
>manual trans, the rest can be common.

2005 RL 4WD.

>got my 04 TL yesterday, nice car !!! oh, i'm not wanting to do indy around
>town, simply can't. and for head wrenching torque i take my 76' Pontiac TA
>out for a spin......

Torque, maybe, but how much faster is it 0-60, 1/4 mile?

Won't even ASK about mileage, pollution, or reliability!

J.

1/4 mile in my TA.

well, it'll blow the doors off any showroom car.....


"JXStern" <JXSternChangeX2R@gte.net> wrote in message
news:3aa5b013gdoric24htij1df3t7apcolmso@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 24 May 2004 01:21:21 GMT, "Kryptoknight"
> <kryptoknight@att.net> wrote:
> >ahhh, hence a TL-S should come back.
> >
> >honda should build a TL-S that is different in TL only by rear drive and
> >manual trans, the rest can be common.
>
> 2005 RL 4WD.
>
> >got my 04 TL yesterday, nice car !!! oh, i'm not wanting to do indy
around
> >town, simply can't. and for head wrenching torque i take my 76' Pontiac
TA
> >out for a spin......
>
> Torque, maybe, but how much faster is it 0-60, 1/4 mile?
>
> Won't even ASK about mileage, pollution, or reliability!
>
> J.
>
>