wmb

I unfortunately do not own an Acura but do like the Acura & Lexus brand best out of all other brand but now leaning toward the Audi A5

I just wanted people to give the TL a chance because beside it's sinful look it's a great overall car and not to write it off completely. So far there's only one review of the TL with the SH-AWD pre-production and it was great. Although other cars were supplied by Acura, it can't be that far off. So until we have an independence one we should not write the TL off due to it's looks.

Vlad_Stein

I am with you on some points and on some I am not...
1. No comment - some of the editors in Edmunds (Josh Jacquot and Scott Oldham) used to write for Sport Compact Car and I have no problems with them. Others, I don't know.
2-3. Very true - I would like to see an independent test (as I have said).
4. I don't know if it is such a bad thing to test a pre-production car... as long as you don't make final judgements based on these preliminary results. Lots of companies do this - to judge the auto press feedback and gauge public reaction to the concept before it is finished. Nothing wrong with that, in my mind. I was surprised to see that the closest car that came to TL was an S4, not the 335i (since 335i has beaten S5 in several tests). It is possible that the track layout (lots of slow corners?) favors awd cars... I don't know and we'll have to wait for an independent test. Do you think that Acura "massaged" the other cars to make them slower / handle worse, etc.? I certainly hope they didn't, because if they did and they were to be exposed by an independent auto publication test(s) very soon after the production model came out, they would loose all the support / interest from the enthusiast community (which I think are the only folks interested in a manual awd acura). Sounds like a suicide business-case to me and I don't see Acura doing that.
5. Driver skill level is not a factor (because there were several journalists testing ALL the cars, and their skill, or lack thereof should have applied to all cars equally).

Personally, I could live with the beak (grit teeth), if the car delivered on the performance.
To be continued...

mmarshall

What do you consider to be "Independent"? My reviews, though obviously not max-peformance or track-oriented like in some of the auto magazines, are about as "independent" as you can get. I don't work for anybody (most of my reviews are done in my spare time, upon request), I don't get paid by anybody, nor do I represent any auto-press group or organization. I prefer it thay way.

UDel

1)It was not just Edmunds who reviewed the 6speed TL, Road and Track, Car and Driver, Automobile, Motortrend, as well as others also reviewed and compared it and all came away highly impressed. So Edmunds is not a viable source because they give Acura a very good review but Wards or JD Power are excellent/great automotive sources to you to be taken as truth because they are often negative against Acuras?

2/3)Honda supplied the cars but what do you honestly think they did to them if they bothered, somehow break into the computer and lower hp(really only possible on the FI car by turning down boost), loosen suspensions, put WD40 on their tires, there is only so much Honda could do that it would negatively effect performance but not be a immediate giveaway to the reviewers that the competition was driving/performing different then what they remember. This whole Honda must of tinkered with all the other cars since they provided them seems weak, it is not like everyone was complaining the competition was suddenly performing poorly and not performing like they remember from previous interviews. Would it be worth it to Honda to be caught detuning the cars they provided to hurt their results, it seems too risky. Their is just no evidence Honda messed with the cars.

4)The pre production SHAWD car would most likely under perform compared to a production model because it would be looser and not gone through all the testing and calibration of a car ready for production. Again, what do you think was done to the pre prod car that would be so different then the production, they might have been able to bump hp by a little but not alot considering it is NA, suspension possibly been tighter but there is nothing stopping them from offering the tighter suspension on the production car, top tires may have been chosen but the owner can choose those same tires and get the same performance.

5)How do you know the drivers can't drive worth a damn, simply because Acura performed well and outperformed its more powerful competiton means it must be rigged or the drivers were bad? There were several different drivers from several magazines that all said the Acura was very impressive and had the best manual they had ever driven and was outperforming its competition, so all the drivers must be bad and the whole test rigged because Acura can't possibly have built a great sports sedan that impressed reviewers?

5)The 6 speed Acura TL did very well in this competition and the vast majority of reviews of the 09 TL have been positive to very positive. I doubt Acura did anything to that test even if they did supply the cars and even if they did it would have been extremely minor as doing too much would have meant all the reviewers would have called them out and said all these cars drive different and not as good as what they remember and the 6 speed TL drives nothing like the 09,feels like it has been heavily modded and they doubt the production model will drive as well.

Vlad_Stein

mmarshal, please don't take offense - I did not mean it that way. Perhaps, I misspoke and should have said "independent comparison". I want to see each manufacturer provide their model with a fitting level of equipment (sport package or equivalent), drain fuel tanks, put 91 octane gas in all, and test them all at a respectable racetrack with a professional driver (some auto journalists at auto mags also qualify), including a street drive to/from the track. We can then see how the cars compare in some objective measures (their lap, acceleration times, braking distances, lateral g, etc), as well as some subjective ones (how easy is the car to control at the limit, how comfortable the seats are, etc.). This is clearly beyond the level of effort of a single person (I was talking about some auto publication). I did not mean to imply your review is bad or tainted in any way, nor did I mean to hijack your thread (I just thought it was an interesting tidbit of information in addition to your review).

Regards,
Vlad.

mmarshall

Oh, no problem. Don't worry. I'm not offended in any way. I just wanted you to clarify what your idea of "independent" mean, that's all....I didn't follow you. And you're right.....track-condition reviews are not my forte, and probably will not ever be.

I just posted an new A4 review, BTW, if you want to read my latest one.

LexFather

I see what you are saying here. Its clear the article was to create a "buzz" around the TL, which is all new and has the buzz of a new bottled water. If you read the Honda/Acura forums, even they dismissed the article.

We will see with an independent test. I just don't see the TL being IS/3 competition, its WAY to big and heavy.

mmarshall

Agreed. The TSX is much closer to the IS in size/weight. But the TSX is FWD and the IS RWD/AWD. The best comparison would be to wait for the AWD TSX and put it up against the IS250 AWD...but we'll have to see what engines Acura gives the AWD TSX. The IS250AWD's 2.5 V6 is rather small and doesn't have much torque.