IS3FIDDY

...and after driving it hard for a good hour, I got a pretty good feel for how the car works in comparison with my IS350.

My wife and I actually began by taking both cars out so we could do a 0-60 run on a deserted back road. Off the line, we both floored it...and it was not even close. She was maybe 2-3 car lengths behind me by 60mph...I had PWR on, S-mode, and VDIM off (though, I didn't need any of it, quite honestly). I couldn't believe the TL was that much slower, but my wife assured me she was flooring it the whole time. She did have some nice 1st gear chirping off the line though (which I didn't have because I didn't do any torque braking).

When driving the TL on my own, I pretty much slammed the throttle from light to light and took it around some back roads to really get a good feel for it. After 30 minutes, I was already missing the IS's torque and engine sound. The TL engine just didn't do it for me. It was a typical Honda engine, with narrow torque band that takes really high revs to get any real speed going. That being said, the engine does comes alive at around 4-5K RPMs (and sounds great), but it just feels like it takes a forever to get there.

The interior fit and finish is another area in which the TL falls way short of the IS. It just felt cheap and plastic-y all over. Not to mention that the sound system pales in comparison to my ML. It was tinny and mid-rangey and I was thoroughly not impressed.

I didn't really play with any of the other gadgets in the TL, since I was mostly focusing on driving it. But I'm sure one area in which the TL takes the cake, technology-wise, is that Nav that links to XM so it can detect upcoming traffic and re-route you accordingly...I was too lazy to try it out, though.

So, I could go on and on about all the ways the IS trounces the TL, but you get the point.

In all fairness however, I think the TL is still a great vehicle and does a few things better than the IS, including the following:

1. The handling/cornering was pretty impressive. Not only did it stay pretty flat through the corners, I pretty much couldn't lose much traction the whole time driving. Only when flooring it from a standstill did the front wheels come loose. I even turned the VSA off.

2. The steering feedback is probably the single best feature of that car, and I have to agree with the magazine reviewers in that the IS really is a sterile drive when it comes to "feeling" the road. I definitely felt more "engaged" driving the TL.

3. The driving position is better. You don't necessarily feel like you're sitting high up, but you can see well all around you and you feel more comfortable and aware of your surroundings. The seats, though not as cushy as the IS, were firm and supportive in all areas.

4. I kind of thought the sequential shift mode changed gears faster than on my IS. You don't get the paddle shifters or the 6th gear, but the shifts were pretty firm and responsive. I think the IS is a little slow and "mushy" on the shifts in comparison.

Well, that's about it. Overall, I really wasn't convinced the TL was a better car, and after a thorough test drive, I am more happy than ever with my IS purchase. It really is a cut above the rest in its class, IMO.

paeko73

The TL was slower because it has smaller engine displacement than the IS's.

Chi-town

Superlexy -- I agree wholeheartedly with your review/assessment; it was spot on. The differences were substantial enough for me to make the switch from the latest TL to the IS.

Belmont

Quote:

The TL was slower because it has smaller engine displacement than the IS's.

Engine displacement by itself really doesn't mean much, unless you're comparing a 1.8l with a big block.

The TL was slower for about 30 different reasons, many of which are much more important than the relatively minor difference in displacement.

ff_

I suppose that means the 1.8 Liter Elise would be slower than the IS350 too?

(man, so much mis-information floating around this forum lately)

Bichon

Really? I found intrusive torque steer robbed the car of steering feel -- sometimes it was severe enough to pull the car off-course. I hold the TL up as a wonderful example of why manufacturers should not put a powerful engine in a front wheel drive car.

Dabigman

The 3l ICS V8 from Honda is smaller and has 650HP, NA too.

ff_

Exactly. Why Honda is so stubborn about not switching to RWD... is beyond comprehension.

Another note of interest: Mazda's new Speed3 is going to be a turbo 4 cylinder, expected to put out around 250 HP to the front wheels. No thanks.

jlin101

I would hope the IS is significantly better than the TL, given the $10k price difference. The performance edge may be minimal when you compare a TL to IS250. For those that don't want to spend $40k+, TL and G35 are great buys.

al503

Simple: Because the majority of car buyers want FWD. They want the superior traction in the bad stuff and they're not as worried about better weight balance, handling, etc. Besides, understeer is much easier to control for the average driver.

4TehNguyen

iTrader: (1)

I wanted a TL 6spd before the IS350 came out, test drove one, liked it. When the IS came out higher price kinda made me hesitant but after taste of lexus and 3 IS350 drives I figured it was well worth the money

Lets Drive

iTrader: (3)

Maybe its just my experiences with a few other cars, but IMO, the TL's steer assist, coupled with its rather large steering wheel, define over-assistance, especially when compared to the RSX and TSX (each with more assistance than the former). Coupled with its less than favorable turn radius, and torque steer, I'm just not really holding it in high esteem (its better suited for 4 passenger highway cruising). I wouldn't really say steering feedback/assistance is a strong point for either the IS or TL.

Mazda builds excellent suspension systems to compensate, and will be limiting torque output in the first few gears to prevent torquesteer. I haven't driven a FWD car yet in the Acura line that I'd ever compare to the 3, or for that matter, any of Mazdas performance cars.

ff_

Is it that they want FWD, or that they don't know any better? When people have had FWD rental fleet crap shoved down their throats by the Big3 for so long, most people have just accepted that "the Big3 must know what's best for me".

Lets Drive

iTrader: (3)

+ FWD is cheaper, lighter, and allows more space on the interior for people who favor fuel economy and ergonimics over performance. Many people who aren't car buffs, fear RWD, while considering AWD to be the next best thing (to each his own). Kind of funny how as of recent, the market is flooded with AWD vehicles, where before your best bet was a Subaru, or truck...but hey, if the demand is there, they will bring the product.

Mike_TX

Funny thing about FWD - except for torque steer (which intrudes only at or near max throttle, and usually only at takeoff), and a little nose-heaviness, in normal driving it's virtually impossible to tell a car is FWD after you get moving.

If the only FWD car you've driven is a Civic or Grand AM, you're not playing with a full deck when you criticize it. A good sport-oriented FWD car, like a TL or even a late-model Maxima SE, will run like stink and carve corners and curves at scary speeds. And it will do it more economically and efficiently than most RWD's.

There's a lot of RWD snobbery out there, and since 99% of us don't track our cars or ever really drive at 9/10's, it's uninformed to criticize FWD cars.

When people tell me FWD cars torque steer on hard takeoff, I say, "True, but RWD cars fishtail. And I can control torque steer better than you can control fishtailing."