Honda Car Forum

I drove a 6-speed the other day. I found the torque steer was poorly
controlled, the shift was sloppy and the brake pedal too soft, although
the brakes were excellent. I am comparing to an RL and an NSX.

Is this typical or did I have a poor example? This one was a demo unit
with about 1100 miles on it.

--
Robert B. Peirce, Venetia, PA 724-941-6883
bob AT peirce-family.com [Mac]
rbp AT cooksonpeirce.com [Office]

Hi Robert,

I have both a TL and an NSX. They really are quite different cars and I am
surprised that you would consider one over the other. Our 2004 TL was
purchased as our sedan for trips and to have a comfortable car. The 1997
NSX is my toy. Even though I live in Santa Barbara, CA, I drive it only
about once a week and that's usually just back and forth to the office.

Regarding the TL, it's OK, but it it has many rattles that are pretty
annoying. Admittedly, it was an early 2004 version and perhaps they have
solved those rattle problems. It is a good sedan, but certainly not a
sports sedan. It's fast, but not compared to the NSX. I like the
navigation system and the blue tooth, hands free mobile phone options.
Especially here in California, where it will soon be illegal to talk on the
cell phone while driving. So a hands free phone is perfect.

With any car with so much horsepower and front wheel drive, there will be
some torque steer. But in the real world, driving seldom requires full
throttle acceleration. If it really bothers you, look at the BMW 3 series
or the Infinity M35 or G35. I think those would perhaps be better suited to
an agressive driving style.

The TL is, in my opinion, a better all-around car for general use. I have
reached the age where I hope to not have to worry about speeding tickets.
Although the TL is fast with a top speed over 140 mph, it really isn't (and
shouldn't) be driven so recklessly. And if you take your car to a racetrack
(often done here in CA), I would advise against the TL.

The NSX, on the other hand, is quite an excellent car. With its mid-engine,
all aluminum body and frame, it is an excellent car -- even by today's
standards. I would recommend it without reservation. It shouldn't be your
only car though. I used mine nearly exclusively for about a year (I also
had a Pathfinder and a motorcycle). It is so much better than a Corvette
and much more in a league with a Ferrari. It is hand assembled in Japan
(well was, as it finished its production run in 2005). I have had mine for
over four years and never had any problems whatsoever. It does require a
new set of tires every 6000 miles, but I knew that from research before I
bought it.

The other good thing about the NSX is its rarity. There were only ~350
built in 1997. And with exclusivity comes its major advantage (and
disadvantage), its cost. I looked for a couple of years before I found one
that fit my requirements -- low miles, red (of course), targa roof, and in
excellent shape.

I found one for sale in Los Angeles that was owned by a VP at Yahoo. He
couldn't sell it in the Bay area, so he had it driven to L.A. to his father
in law's house. I was the first one to look at it and bought it after a
test ride. There were several others would wanted it, but I made it there
first. One guy from Florida would have flown in to pick it up, of I didn't
take it.

I haven't regretted purchasing the NSX at all. It's been a great car and it
hasn't lost a bit of its value in over 4 years. Name another car that can
be said about.

The TL is a good car as well. It's just a very different car, for a
different purpose entirely. If your wallet can stand it, buy both. If you
really need a sedan, then the TL, or the G35 would fit the bill. You should
test drive both.

Good luck,

- Russ


"Robert Peirce" <bob@peirce-family.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:bob-A9464B.11135112112006@news.verizon.net...
>I drove a 6-speed the other day. I found the torque steer was poorly
> controlled, the shift was sloppy and the brake pedal too soft, although
> the brakes were excellent. I am comparing to an RL and an NSX.
>
> Is this typical or did I have a poor example? This one was a demo unit
> with about 1100 miles on it.
>
> --
> Robert B. Peirce, Venetia, PA 724-941-6883
> bob AT peirce-family.com [Mac]
> rbp AT cooksonpeirce.com [Office]
>

On Sun, 12 Nov 2006 11:40:31 -0800, "RLL" <rlombardo@cox.net> wrote:

>The NSX, on the other hand, is quite an excellent car. With its mid-engine,
>all aluminum body and frame, it is an excellent car -- even by today's
>standards. I would recommend it without reservation. It shouldn't be your
>only car though.

Why on earth not?

I'm on my second NSX, and while it isn't my only car I'd have no
reservations at all about using it as primary transportation - indeed
I have done for spells of time.

I agree with everything else you said about the NSX though. It is not
only a near-perfect driver's car, it also has all the reliability you
have come to expect from the Honda Motor Company.

As for the tires, if the rate of wear really bothers anyone, they can
have the alignment dialed out to a more neutral setting. But, yuck!

Just one time when I got a new set of tires, for giggles and grins, I
got my '98 aligned to the original 1991 alignment specs (the specs
that caused a class-action lawsuit against Honda). The car *really*
came alive! The rears were toast in 2,000 miles, but what a ride!

Oh, and replacement tires really *have* to be the specially made OEM
Bridgestones or Yokos. They cost no more than other tires. They
don't have the sexy-looking long vee tread pattern that all the boy
racers want these days. My second NSX had a new set of Michelin
Pilots on when I bought it. They simply didn't work properly on the
car and in 500 miles I'd had enough of them and replaced them with a
set of Bridgestones.
--
Dan.

Robert Peirce wrote:
> I drove a 6-speed the other day. I found the torque steer was poorly
> controlled, the shift was sloppy and the brake pedal too soft, although
> the brakes were excellent. I am comparing to an RL and an NSX.
>
> Is this typical or did I have a poor example? This one was a demo unit
> with about 1100 miles on it.
>

Acura sells only a handful of 6 speed TLs so no surprise that it isn't
well engineered. (Compare with the new Infiniti G35 sport 6-speed that
has a standard limited slip differential.) Acura seems confused about
whether or not they build sporty cars. For example, consider the NSX
that hasn't had a major upgrade, other than price, for 15 years. A base
2006 Corvette can blow it off the track. Or their sportiest sedan, the
TSX, an upgraded home market Accord. The TL is a decent near luxury car
'cause they can be had at a discount. My mother likes her's. The new RL
is a sales failure; grossly overpriced, under-powered and under-styled
(according to many press reports).

Try a 2007 Infiniti G35 or M35/M45 or wait a year or so for the new TL
that will have to compete with the G35 and BMW 3-series. I suspect
Honda will have to throw in their SH-AWD system as standard equipment.
I wouldn't be surprised to hear they've dropped the manual
transmission, though.

There is speculation that a new TL is due out for 2008? Would this be a
complete new redesign? HD radio?

S
"ACAR" <getoutanpush@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1163477422.426521.61420@i42g2000cwa.googlegro ups.com...
>
> Robert Peirce wrote:
>> I drove a 6-speed the other day. I found the torque steer was poorly
>> controlled, the shift was sloppy and the brake pedal too soft, although
>> the brakes were excellent. I am comparing to an RL and an NSX.
>>
>> Is this typical or did I have a poor example? This one was a demo unit
>> with about 1100 miles on it.
>>
>
> Acura sells only a handful of 6 speed TLs so no surprise that it isn't
> well engineered. (Compare with the new Infiniti G35 sport 6-speed that
> has a standard limited slip differential.) Acura seems confused about
> whether or not they build sporty cars. For example, consider the NSX
> that hasn't had a major upgrade, other than price, for 15 years. A base
> 2006 Corvette can blow it off the track. Or their sportiest sedan, the
> TSX, an upgraded home market Accord. The TL is a decent near luxury car
> 'cause they can be had at a discount. My mother likes her's. The new RL
> is a sales failure; grossly overpriced, under-powered and under-styled
> (according to many press reports).
>
> Try a 2007 Infiniti G35 or M35/M45 or wait a year or so for the new TL
> that will have to compete with the G35 and BMW 3-series. I suspect
> Honda will have to throw in their SH-AWD system as standard equipment.
> I wouldn't be surprised to hear they've dropped the manual
> transmission, though.
>

Skip wrote:
> There is speculation that a new TL is due out for 2008? Would this be a
> complete new redesign? HD radio?
>
> S
>
http://www.vtec.net/modelmatrix/

ACAR wrote:
> Skip wrote:
> > There is speculation that a new TL is due out for 2008? Would this be a
> > complete new redesign? HD radio?
> >
> > S
> >
> http://www.vtec.net/modelmatrix/

I have a 07 TL Type S. It is a sweet car - with a couple minor issues.
It feels very powerful, but the engine is new, and I have not really
pushed it too hard yet.

I believe the 08/09 Acura TL will have a V8 option to compete with
Mercedes and Lexus. It should also feature AWD or RWD for greater
handling and to eliminate torque steer.

frokenstein@gmail.com wrote:

>
> I have a 07 TL Type S. It is a sweet car - with a couple minor issues.
> It feels very powerful, but the engine is new, and I have not really
> pushed it too hard yet.
>
> I believe the 08/09 Acura TL will have a V8 option to compete with
> Mercedes and Lexus. It should also feature AWD or RWD for greater
> handling and to eliminate torque steer.
>

If Honda were to build such a beast it would be in the RL class.

Personally I think a V-8 in a passenger sedan is simply a waste of
resources. There is no good reason why anyone needs more power
available than your TL-S has. There are reasons for all wheel drive,
which is what moving up to an RL does for you. The downside of all
wheel drive is the fuel economy penalty paid and other increased running
costs as well as higher up front costs. It still might make sense if
you live in bad winter territory. Realistically though, traction
control and stability control make most modern cars into good snow cars
without all wheel drive. Put a set of four winter tires on and you are
good to go. All wheel drive only helps with acceleration. It does
nothing for braking and little for turning.

John

In article <1163477422.426521.61420@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups. com>,
"ACAR" <getoutanpush@yahoo.com> wrote:

> A base
> 2006 Corvette can blow it [NSX] off the track.

That depends a lot on the driver. There aren't many cars as easy to
drive fast as the NSX. I have more trouble with Porsches and modified
S2000s. The New Nissan Zs are also very quick, but the base Corvettes
not so much.

--
Robert B. Peirce, Venetia, PA 724-941-6883
bob AT peirce-family.com [Mac]
rbp AT cooksonpeirce.com [Office]

In article <TMK5h.57$Nw5.26@newsfe16.phx>, "RLL" <rlombardo@cox.net>
wrote:

> I have both a TL and an NSX. They really are quite different cars and I am
> surprised that you would consider one over the other.

I wouldn't. I have a 2006 RL and a 1999 NSX, both of which are fine. I
also have a 2000 Prelude, and the TL-S seemed like it might be a good
replacement. Unfortunately, while it has a lot of power and stopping
ability, it doesn't seem as nice all around as the Prelude.

> If it really bothers you, look at the BMW 3 series
> or the Infinity M35 or G35. I think those would perhaps be better suited to
> an agressive driving style.

I also own a 1977 MB 6.9. I wouldn't consider a modern German car
because the are way too complicated. I would consider the Infinity if I
weren't such a Honda fan. Ditto for Lexus.

--
Robert B. Peirce, Venetia, PA 724-941-6883
bob AT peirce-family.com [Mac]
rbp AT cooksonpeirce.com [Office]