Hey, now this would be an interesting Mitsu/Subie alternative.
Thank god they aren't letting that turbo 4 go to waste.
I drove an RDX a little while back. SH-AWD didn't make it truly "nimble", but you could feel it working to rotate the car.

Quote :

" Early look: 2009 Acura TSX February11 february2008/acura-tsx.jpg Acura announced today it will debut the redesigned 2009 TSX at the 2008 New York Auto Show next month. The company also released a single image of the car. The 2009 Acura TSX will be the second generation of Acura's entry level sedan and feature numerous improvements. Acura unveiled the new 2009 RL at the Chicago Auto Show last week and also announced the company will introduce an-all new TL performance luxury sedan later this year. The Acura TSX is the same vehicle as the European Honda Accord, which the Japanese automaker recently previewed in wagon form. As previously reported, the 2009 TSX will also be available with a new 2.2L i-DETC four-cylinder diesel option. Power for the base TSX is expected to come from a 2.4L i-VTEC four-cylinder — rated in the 220 to 230 horsepower range — driving the front wheels via a six-speed manual or a five-speed automatic. The new TSX/Euro Accord will be based on the Accord Tourer Concept revealed last year. Look for Acura to offer a Type-S model of the TSX. Power is said to come from the turbocharged engine found in the Acura RDX — tuned to 260 horsepower — and will be connect to a six-speed manual or a DSG gearbox. But unlikely the base TSX, the Type-S is expected to use Honda's Super Handling All Wheel Drive. The TSX should start production by the end of 2008. "

http://www.leftlanenews.com/acura-tsx-future.html

2/11/2008 8:12:56 AM

Quote :

"2.4L i-VTEC four-cylinder — rated in the 220 to 230 horsepower range "

wat

is rev to 10,000?

2/11/2008 8:19:35 AM

Yeah why on earth would you want a high reving engine.

Gas is getting cheaper by the day

2/11/2008 8:21:59 AM

I am glad they didn't go to 6 cylinders.

It is high time Lexus and Infiniti came out with a 4 cylinder model. (RWD please)

2/11/2008 8:26:22 AM

I wish it had a 6 cylinder. I hate downshifting my automatic should have been 3 series entry level luxury car

2/11/2008 8:28:40 AM

There is a Saturn somewhere missing its grille.

2/11/2008 12:37:51 PM

http://www.leftlanenews.com/honda-euro-accord.html

More pix here.... of the Euro-Accord, but the sedan ought to be mostly the same as our TSX. Supposedly the diesel is coming in 2009.

2/11/2008 3:56:14 PM

so the NA 2.4 is going to make 230 hp. & the turbo 2.3 is going to make... 260hp.

Nobody else sees a problem with that?

2/11/2008 4:03:34 PM

Not really.

i mean your 1.8t made 180... i've seen 2.0s n/a make 200

the torque will probably have a HUGE difference though.

[Edited on February 11, 2008 at 4:06 PM. Reason : .]

2/11/2008 4:05:41 PM

its no mazda.

2.3L NA - 156hp
2.3L Turbo - 263hp

2/11/2008 4:23:47 PM

^^^peak numbers are of little concern when determining a vehicle's performance.

[Edited on February 11, 2008 at 4:26 PM. Reason : .]

2/11/2008 4:25:49 PM

Yeah i mean god forbid your car peak torque after 4000 rpm

unless the power band looks like a spike on an ekg peak power does factor in...

i mean not everyone likes a 330hp 455.

2/11/2008 5:10:49 PM

what the fuck are you talking about? that made ZERO sense. ekg's? 455's? wtfbbq?

2/11/2008 5:25:17 PM

yawn.

2/11/2008 5:44:53 PM

Quote :

"so the NA 2.4 is going to make 230 hp. & the turbo 2.3 is going to make... 260hp. Nobody else sees a problem with that?"

The 2.4 will probably make 150 lb ft of torque while the turbo 2.3 will probably be over 200. Big difference. Also, it'll probably be making that 260HP at 6.5K RPM instead of 8.5k.

That's all speculation, but if I'm anywhere close to being correct it will make a huge difference in the way the car drives.

2/11/2008 5:59:49 PM

Anybody seen pics of the new RL? Looks like it fell off the ugly tree and hit every branch on the way down.

WTF is Acura up to. That TSX looks promising, though I'd never consider it. If they're not gonna give their flagship vehicle a V8 it at least needs to be RWD.

2/11/2008 6:02:16 PM

unless it is nsx

acura=boring

2/11/2008 6:03:42 PM

They need to re-think the new grille designs. The RL got the same treatment. Looks terrible IMO

2/11/2008 6:08:18 PM

^^^^winnAr

2/11/2008 9:30:35 PM

acura hired chris bangle as it's head designer apparently (jk).

acura products keep getting uglier by the minute.

[Edited on February 11, 2008 at 9:44 PM. Reason : e]

2/11/2008 9:44:09 PM

Quote :

"http://www.leftlanenews.com/honda-euro-accord.html More pix here.... of the Euro-Accord, but the sedan ought to be mostly the same as our TSX. Supposedly the diesel is coming in 2009."

That's the Accord that the whole world should get, not just the Europeans.

Looks a gell of a lot better than the US Accord, as it did in the previous generations.

2/11/2008 10:00:10 PM

that does look pretty much like an accord

2/12/2008 1:19:11 AM

of course the powerband is going to be completely different. but thats kind of my point, very un-honda.

2/12/2008 9:42:17 AM

Very accord looking in that picture... not very exciting... the significant increase in weight for the AWD and the increase of power might turn out to be a wash... and I hope they don't make it any bigger... like the recent Accords... I mean my 2001 civic is pretty much the same size as my 1996 accord was... didn't the American automotive industry learn something about bigger heavier cars vs small imports with great gas milleage back in the 70's?

STOP MAKING YOUR CARS BIGGER!

All this and I'm a TSX fan

2/12/2008 4:35:31 PM

Quote :

"^^^^winnAr"

hahaha i said the same thing about 3 hours early fuckin retard.

2/12/2008 4:38:59 PM

oh, really? would that be where you rambled something incoherent about vw engines and torque making all the difference here? or no, i know... it must have been when you brought highly relevant things like ekg's and 455's into the mix, right?

please just do as all a favor and quit posting shit that sounds like it came from a toddler. even giving you the benefit of the doubt that you were trying to say the correct thing (doubtful), you still posted a big batch of FAIL.

2/12/2008 5:27:24 PM

^ he meant the 8th post in the thread (2nd after my 2nd post- oops):

Quote :

" Not really. i mean your 1.8t made 180... i've seen 2.0s n/a make 200 the torque will probably have a HUGE difference though. "

[Edited on February 12, 2008 at 5:33 PM. Reason : whoops... wrong about when he said it]

2/12/2008 5:32:45 PM

that doesn't explain shit about WHY the peak hp power difference isn't any big deal.

2/12/2008 5:53:34 PM

Quote :

"Very accord looking in that picture... not very exciting... the significant increase in weight for the AWD and the increase of power might turn out to be a wash... and I hope they don't make it any bigger... like the recent Accords... I mean my 2001 civic is pretty much the same size as my 1996 accord was... didn't the American automotive industry learn something about bigger heavier cars vs small imports with great gas milleage back in the 70's? STOP MAKING YOUR CARS BIGGER! "

While the individual models are getting bigger, at least Honda is bringing in models to fill into the gaps left (ie Fit is about the same size as an older Civic...) Yes, that doesn't fix Acura's problem, but in my mind they really abandoned the compact market when they replaced the Teg with the RSX and didn't include a coupe version. Now the RSX is gone with no planned replacement, and with Infiniti never replacing the G20 and Lexus never making anything smaller than the IS in the first place, the compact Japanese luxury model is essentially dead.
(Though it's debatable if you could have ever attached "luxury" to the Integra, I'm not 100% sure why we didn't get it as a Honda anyhow...)

2/12/2008 6:03:06 PM

^^oh, aight, I see your pt. Yeah, they'd probably want to avoid confusion in the showroom. "I pay all this more money for the turbo and it's only worth 230 hp?" That might make the more expensive model a tougher sale.

So... here's how I'm rationalizing it:

currently (acura.com) :
2.4L I4 ---------TSX makes 205 hp at 7000 rpm, 164 lbft @ 4500 rpm, and redlines at 7100 rpm
2.3L I4 turbo----RDX makes 240 hp at 6500 rpm, 260 lbft @ 4500 rpm, and redlines at 6800 rpm

It's possible that the explanation of the narrow gap in the forecasted outputs being a mere 30-40 hp is that leftlanenews is just being conservative in their estimations by tossing 15-25 hp on there willy-nilly. Probably a safe bet. However...

I think that getting another 20-30 hp out of the NA 2.4 is really stretching things a bit. It'll take a ton more re-examination of that engine to pull off compared to the 2.3L turbo achieving the same gains. If they really do run the numbers that LLN is suggesting, that 2.4 is going to feel VERY strained next to the 2.3T, and they will want to give a yardstick to buyers to understand the difference without having to give every conflicted buyer two test drives for them to figure it out.

I think LLN just has the numbers wrong. I expect the 2.4 to be closer to 220 than 230 and the 2.3T to be closer to 270/80 than the 260 they're predicting... Plus... given the outputs of the Evo and Sti, along with their Ralliart and WRX siblings, they have a pretty good incentive to turn up the wick on the turbo-SH-AWD model if they want to sell a relatively compact sedan in the 30s...

2/12/2008 6:32:49 PM

even with that power unless they cut back on the weight it won't matter much when you match it up

'luxury' at this level is another word for 'extra weight'

2/13/2008 2:00:09 PM

i was told that the tsx will come in 4 cyl, 6 cyl, and diesel.

but who knows.

and the TL will have a base model of 300hp AWD. and the RL will be another beast.

someone find out if its true.

2/18/2008 10:31:42 PM

^
true.

the RL is going to be less round, more angular to fit with current design.

2/18/2008 10:42:34 PM

i wish my car were AWD

2/18/2008 10:43:49 PM

What's needed is a TSX Type-S!

2/19/2008 12:04:41 PM

what i need is a RWD tsx type s.

2/19/2008 1:11:25 PM