Thoughts on TSX coupe

[MadSpleen85]

But I have a family. What I want isn't a coupe or the sedan. Gimme this:


Silver would also work for me:

Looks good to me Honda needs to bring the Accord wagon back to the US. As popular as minivans and suvs are. I thinkg the extra space would sell the car.

[oneoffaccord]

a couple of things. a accord wagon would sell here suv/crossovers are big right now. but what car would it really be? a Accord wagon or a Tsx wagon? and if they do plan on makng this Tsx coupe it would need more power 240 at least.

[Accord13&BA4]

I really wanted to buy an RSX type S, but that's axed at the end of this year...perhaps i will

The TSX Coupe? well, i can only imagine it would be an offshoot of the current Accord Coupe, or perhaps an entire different platform. Right now, There is no market for sport coupes...The Celica went belly up after all these years, im talking about 25 years +. The Prelude got canned. The S2000 seems to be doing well, but i see the S2000 as well being axed sooner or later.

I hope this new TSX coupe isn't crazy expensive, i hope it turns out to be a very well balanced car. We'll just wait and see...

[deckeda]

... a accord wagon would sell here suv/crossovers are big right now. ...

Many manufacturers who make wagons tend to disagree with you. Or rather, they know we are buying those SUVs and crossovers instead of wagons. The Accord and Camry wagons were never big sellers here; none of them are or were.

BMW now only offers an AWD 3-series wagon in the U.S., to appeal to those that feel like they'd be missing out on the AWD their neighbor's SUV has. "More sport than wagon" is how they advertise it, for the wagon-averse.

Wagon versions of VWs come here late, after the sedans. And as of now, I still don't see a Jetta wagon on VW's site.

The Legacy is a clear exception to a wagon that isn't ashamed to be a wagon.

And Mazda's 6 is that marketplace freak of nature niche players can afford to do. But even they are making a big stink instead with their 2 new crossovers. Ever see a TV ad for the 6 wagon, even when introduced? How long will the 6 wagon last with the MX-7 around, at the same kind of money?

Even the Taurus is gone. When the U.S. pulls wagons from its own market, you know it's a goner.

[oneoffaccord]

heres what ive found:

Word going around and reported on vtec.net, is that the 07 Integra in japan will most likely get the 2.3 liter turbo VTEC putting out 280-300hp. That means the TSX coupe that is rumored to replace the RSX would get the same motor probably detuned to about 20hp less than the JDM model. this would make a lot of sense. clearly that hp gap between the NA honda models has caught up and competitor models like the EVO, STI and even SRT-4 are a superior choice for most people.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[sonikaccord]

OT I love how the turbo on that motor kinda has vtec too. lol

[HondaB18]

reason why acura dropped the name integra in their lineup and replace it with three letters is because it follows their other names, RL, TL, MDX etc. i guess the general population like to resort to letters and numbers then names.

acura wants to aim more towards the luxury side and thats why they are directing their tuner cars to honda by getting rid of the rsx and getting a tsx coupe to satisfy those who want a tsx but a little more sports look (although i agree thats pointless). dunno about the nsx

i still see a lot of rsx (in my area anyways) and they're pretty common. i don't think they did too bad in sales but rather less then what they have anticipated

honda is doing so good so far, hard to say whether or not they are going downhill because of the prelude (didn't do so well in sales) and integra (acura felt it needed a change because that chassis was on its 7th year)

and the turbo charged integra is still rumored

honda/acura is a big company and i don't think they would do anything rash to ruin their reputation or profits

[f22a4bandit]

They use letters instead of words for the U.S. market because some of us are too lazy to say "I have an Acura Integra." I think Honda is about to break through into the turbo world, seeing as a lot of their competition has turbo vehicles in the line, and introducing the RDX is the first step. The S2000 won't fade away any time soon, it has a pretty nice market with the "mid-life crisis" crowds. Honda did well in the NA department, and now that they are about to get into the turbo game, things are going to get PRETTY interesting. Honda > Toyota!!

[gloryaccordy]

Actually Honda went the alpha-numeric route because people were refering to their cars as "Integras" and "Legends" rather than "Acuras"...a decade after the release of the first TL people are still calling the cars "RLs" and "RSXs", not "Acura RSXs"...I guess it also cushioned the blow of all the old regular name models decline into mediocrity (the TL and RL that immediately followed the Vigor and Legend were pretty bad IMO)...I'm guessing it was also to match the Europeans who have always had numbers and letters to name their cars. That system is wack though.

As far as a TSX coupe, I think it would be a great idea, not to replace the RSX, but just to generate more sales for Acura in general. They don't have any coupes. Someone who might have wanted a Prelude doesn't want the girth of the Accord Coupe V6 or the boy-racer image of the new Si...the TSX would fill that spot nicely. Plus it wouldn't cost much to retool to make frames and stuff for a coupe.

As far as wagons in the US, I don't get why a manufacturer would pull something off the market. Wagons are so easy to make from sedans I don't see why every sedan doesn't have a wagon variant. Mazda has proven wagons don't have to be dowdy with the Protege and the 6, and they've been making money with them. BMW, Audi, and Mercedes have always had wagons. I think the more bodystyles a manufacturer has, the better...because if they don't have it and someone else does, guess what, they're assed out.

We'll see what happens with the TSX coupe though. Knowing how Honda's been acting in recent years, they'll cut the S2000 and make another SUV...maybe cut the Si and bring over the Stream...turbo the TL but leave it FWD...etc. etc. Outside of the TSX there is no new Honda or Acura I would buy.

[sackingz123]

toyota on honda anyday, good old days of toyota was the best, ae-86, turbo celicas, turbo supras, rwd cressida,old skool landcrusiers, mr2.....

[owequitit]

You guys are so pessimistic. LOL! It is funny.

A TSX coupe would be a great idea for the same reasons a 3 Series Coupe and a M-B C class coupe are a great idea.

It gives a larger product fold that appeals to more people.

A TSX Coupe is much more fitting for the Acura line up than the boy racer RSX ever was. They didn't discontinue the RSX because it would interfere with another car, they discontinued it because sales tanked, and it was no longer a viable solution. Acura is moving upscale, and the RSX didn't fit into the strategy.

The current Gen TSX is based on the Euro Accord because they thought they had a new viable entry level solution, but they didn't want to spend billions of dollars to find out they were wrong. It was easier to adapt what they had as a study. The first gen Odyssey and Ridgeline are prime examples.

They originally expected to sell 20,000 per year. They exceeded that in the first couple months of the first year the car was on sale. They have been selling as fast as they could build them ever since.

They aren't afraid to do things differently. They never have been. The original charachter of Honda is very much intact, and they have never been a "follow me too" company. I hope they never will be.

The next gen TSX is going to be based on the Sports4 concept that debuted on the auto show circuit a few years ago. It is rumored to have a 2.3liter Turbo from the RDX, and SH-AWD. That will pretty much eliminate the bitching about FWD, because the TL will certainly move away from it also. No more FF Acuras.

The next gen NSX is known to have a V10 engine producing right around 500HP. There is some speculation on whether it will be a MR coupe like the original or an FR 4 seat coupe like the one shown in this link.

http://www.vtec.net/news/news-item?news_item_id=611370

Honda has alluded to MR, so I think they may be developing another coupe to slot between the RL and the NSX, or possibly on the same level of the RL.

It is rumored to be RWD only. The debut model of Honda's V8 perhaps. It's output is rumored to be 400-450HP from a 4.6liter displacement.

Rumor has it that the next RL will be based on FR architecture, probably sharing a lot with that coupe, and will be offered in V8 models.

That should pretty much quell all the RWD bitching. In all honesty, it is a status thing and a marketing thing. Most people will NEVER get far enough into the limits of a FWD Acura to actually NEED the advantage of RWD. In fact, it handles almost as well as its RWD competition. The only real complaint is the torque steer, which at that price level is a legitimate gripe.

People also need to keep in mind that the typical gestation period of a new car, especially with a complete change in architecture is 5-6 years. They are a competitive company, but it still takes time to get this stuff to market, especially when they are going to have 4 or 5 new models within a couple of years.

What does this mean for Honda?

It means they can pilfer all the FWD technology for Honda, intstead of having to worry about rummaging sales from Acura.

Perhaps the 2008 Accord will debut with a 200HP 2.4 liter four that is no longer needed in the TSX. The V6 is rumored to displace up to 3.5 liters, but I suspect it could be 3.2 also. They can put LSD trannies in those cars. They can also keep them appealing to a younger client, which is something they atually are very good at. Honda is considered to have the best median age in the industry. Old enough to pay the bills, young enough to come back. That indicates good corporate health.

They also STILL have just about the most loyal customer base in the world. That indicates good corporate health.

They actually have had the best selling midsize car since the early 1990's when you factor out fleet sales. Both Ford and Toyota not only were relying on fleet sales to rental companies to hold the title, but they also have both had to resort to incentives to keep cars moving. Even the 07 Camry has some rebates available, while the Accord does not. The 06 Accords are pretty much all gone. Especially certain trim levels, colors. Even with the fleet sales added in, the TOTAL difference in most years has been about 20,000 units. Honda typically sales slightly less than 1% of Accords to fleets.

Not having to rebate or sell to rental companies indictates good health, because not only does selling to rental companies water down brand image (ask GM and Ford about that one), but they are also sold at a substantial fleet discount which is bad for the bottom line.

The bottom line is that Honda doesn't rebate their cars or offer incentives because they don't have to. They are pretty much selling every model faster than they can build it. Sure, they are adding capacity, but they are doing it at a rate that insures they won't have too much capacity in the near future, and they are doing it without sacrificing quality. Toyota can't say the same this year.

They have seen very positive sales growth in most areas this year. Most of the people bitching aren't looking at the statistics correctly. The 06 Accord shows a decrease in sales, but not that much, and they are neglecting the fact that the model year was cut short by 3 months.

They also have not grown as fast as Toyota. Does that mean they aren't doing as well? They are profitable which is job #1. Their growth has also been limited by capacity. So even if they could have grown faster, or wanted to, they didn't have the production capacity. Toyota has chosen to sacrifice some quality, probably to achieve number 1 in the US. If they keep it up, it is going to bite them. Having a supply shortage due to demand is a very swell position to be in.

Anybody who says that the new Hondas aren't in touch with who they are, hasn't given them a fair chance. The 2006 Accord looks good in person, and much like previous generation Accords (CB7 included) gets flack for being blandly styled. It drives BETTER than a CB7, as well as the competition I have sampled, and some cars costing far more, and it does so without sacrificing the standards of today's consumer. People are too focused on "specifications." 99% of the people on this board should know that it isn't all about "specs", because if it were, the CB7 would be unable to do what it has done.

[gloryaccordy]

I'm gonna have to agree to disagree, owequitit.

IMO Honda has lost its way. The cars have grown fatter/heavier and chunkier, and a lot of the cool niche models they had (CRX, del Sol, Prelude) have all gone away or been compromised. IMO when they made a different Accord for the various markets in the 6th generation they lost me. I understand that they have to make money and be competitive, but if a CB7 can seat 5 American adults comfortably why the need for extra room, especially if someone who needs to carry a lot of people/stuff can buy a Pilot/Odyssey?

Two companies that I like are Mazda and Nissan. Mazda's 6 shows you can make a car that is competitive with the CamCord w/o having something completely bloated and without a soul, and the Altima, while not as exciting as the 6, has a nice shape, roomy interior and passionate powertrain. Granted, the 6 is as heavy as the CamCords and the Altima is just as big, but they are smaller and lighter respectively.

I'll have to check the sales numbers but I don't see how Honda having legitimately fun models would hurt their bottom line. It never did. The Prelude was always a SWB Accord coupe. The Civic had a successful 2-seater variant for quite some time, and the success of the EG6 TODAY is indicative of the kind of success they'd have with something similar brand new. And yes, while Acura remains a profitable brand, it wouldn't kill them to have a full RWD lineup...from what I know the RL is suffering, and the TL can only handle so much more power. Meanwhile, in the Northeast people are buying up 5-series and M35s like hot cakes.

But if Honda has it's customer base and is making money then I can't really tell them how to do business...but I think their days of making cars that got people excited are over. These days I only get giddy over new Honda engines...

[ACC0RD22]

I think they tried to be overly conservative in the past few years, but if the New Si is anything that will be a light to the future, I have a feeling that Honda will produce many exciting cars, just like the ones that they were producing in the early to mid nineties.

Honestly, EVERYTHING has gotten bigger, its not like only the accord got bigger over the years. can a CB7 fit 5 comfortably? yes. Is it more comfortable for 5 people in a new accord? I dont know first hand, but Im gonna guess that anything with more room inside is gonna be more comfortable.

[sackingz123]

I'm gonna have to agree to disagree, owequitit.

IMO Honda has lost its way. The cars have grown fatter/heavier and chunkier, and a lot of the cool niche models they had (CRX, del Sol, Prelude) have all gone away or been compromised. IMO when they made a different Accord for the various markets in the 6th generation they lost me. I understand that they have to make money and be competitive, but if a CB7 can seat 5 American adults comfortably why the need for extra room, especially if someone who needs to carry a lot of people/stuff can buy a Pilot/Odyssey?

Two companies that I like are Mazda and Nissan. Mazda's 6 shows you can make a car that is competitive with the CamCord w/o having something completely bloated and without a soul, and the Altima, while not as exciting as the 6, has a nice shape, roomy interior and passionate powertrain. Granted, the 6 is as heavy as the CamCords and the Altima is just as big, but they are smaller and lighter respectively.

I'll have to check the sales numbers but I don't see how Honda having legitimately fun models would hurt their bottom line. It never did. The Prelude was always a SWB Accord coupe. The Civic had a successful 2-seater variant for quite some time, and the success of the EG6 TODAY is indicative of the kind of success they'd have with something similar brand new. And yes, while Acura remains a profitable brand, it wouldn't kill them to have a full RWD lineup...from what I know the RL is suffering, and the TL can only handle so much more power. Meanwhile, in the Northeast people are buying up 5-series and M35s like hot cakes.

But if Honda has it's customer base and is making money then I can't really tell them how to do business...but I think their days of making cars that got people excited are over. These days I only get giddy over new Honda engines...

isnt mazda the ones always breaking down..lol...well they are majority owned by Ford..uhh, i dont like that..

[owequitit]

I'm gonna have to agree to disagree, owequitit.

IMO Honda has lost its way. The cars have grown fatter/heavier and chunkier, and a lot of the cool niche models they had (CRX, del Sol, Prelude) have all gone away or been compromised. IMO when they made a different Accord for the various markets in the 6th generation they lost me. I understand that they have to make money and be competitive, but if a CB7 can seat 5 American adults comfortably why the need for extra room, especially if someone who needs to carry a lot of people/stuff can buy a Pilot/Odyssey?

Two companies that I like are Mazda and Nissan. Mazda's 6 shows you can make a car that is competitive with the CamCord w/o having something completely bloated and without a soul, and the Altima, while not as exciting as the 6, has a nice shape, roomy interior and passionate powertrain. Granted, the 6 is as heavy as the CamCords and the Altima is just as big, but they are smaller and lighter respectively.

I'll have to check the sales numbers but I don't see how Honda having legitimately fun models would hurt their bottom line. It never did. The Prelude was always a SWB Accord coupe. The Civic had a successful 2-seater variant for quite some time, and the success of the EG6 TODAY is indicative of the kind of success they'd have with something similar brand new. And yes, while Acura remains a profitable brand, it wouldn't kill them to have a full RWD lineup...from what I know the RL is suffering, and the TL can only handle so much more power. Meanwhile, in the Northeast people are buying up 5-series and M35s like hot cakes.

But if Honda has it's customer base and is making money then I can't really tell them how to do business...but I think their days of making cars that got people excited are over. These days I only get giddy over new Honda engines...

Like I said. You are focused on specs. The Accords haven't gotten any more bloated than anything else in the segment.

The Altima has a nice shape, but the Accord doesn't? Have you parked them next to each other lately? They look almost identical, from the bubbly shape and silouhette, to the shapes of the head and tail lights. Please explain to me how one looks chunky and the other does not.

Also, it is ok that the Altima, the replacement for the Stanza has grown to match the market, is slightly bigger and has room and a soulfull powertrain, yet you haven't driven an Accord, and it is bloated?

Please explain the justification of the double standard that the Accord should stay small, while all the competition gets bigger and more powerful? Sounds like a biased double standard to me... Or the fact that the Altima is such a great car, but the Accord that can match or beat it in every important way is a turd.

The Accord's powertrain is plenty soulful for the segment, especially if you are impressed with Chevy's OHV 3.5, and has no problem keeping up with ANYTHING in the segment. It may not be the all out fastest, but it definitely comes down to the driver, and these cars have other priorities besides speed. Don't forget the J30 is somewhat underrated.

My mom's car still weighs within 500lbs of my CB, and that is being significantly bigger, with all the extra features, 6 airbags, larger wheels and tires, bigger engine etc etc. EVERY car in the US market has gained a substantial amount of weight, not just the Accord. If you don't believe me, you are welcome to go put an Altima SE V6 and an Accord EX V6 on the scales and see what they say. Honda's are typically among the lighter cars in the segment, not the heaviest, and that applies to just about any model from any year. Nissan doesn't have magic steel that results in a hugely different curb weight. Honda is pretty efficient with using as little material as possible to achieve a strutural goal. So are Nissan and Toyota. That is why SIMILARLY loaded weights are typically within 100lbs for all three.

And the CM will STILL out run my CB in every way shape and form without breaking a sweat. My car will now outhandle it because of my suspension, but stock for stock, it wouldn't even be close. And the CM is just as intimate to drive as the CB ever was. And it sounds better and gets better gas mileage to boot.

Like I said, you haven't even given the car a fair chance. That is YOUR fault, not Honda's.

Have you even driven a CM? And I mean driven.

Every conversation we have had like this has basically been you resorting to specs and computer calculators to define the universe. Go drive one. Flog on it a little bit. Try out a six speed. Go ahead. You might actually like it. I have actually driven and spent time in both the autos, and the manuals. I can assure you, they are not the slugs you portray them to be.

They feel great, they have superb features and build quality, and they move a hell of a lot quicker than anyone wants to give them credit for. Sorry, but a stock 3.0 V6 four door that can pull down mid to low 14's, and will put Mercedes and BMWs of just a few years ago to shame in materials and build quality, for half of their PAST price, is ok in my book. The car also doesn't handle nearly as flacidly as people want to pretend it does either.

Most of the people I have seen bag on Accords, have either purchased something they are trying to justify, or have never given the car a fair chance. If you want to have a different opinion fine, but it should at least be based on reality.

Problem is, they just can't leave well enough alone. If I had a dollar for every numbnuts that tried to prove something on the road because the car was a Honda, I woudn't still be driving my CB7 everyday. LOL!

It is almost like they are deadset on making Honda owners realize their cars are inferior. Unfortunately, they usually end up with a different reality.

Maybe, they feel in order to be the best you have to beat the best. I have no idea WHY they do it, but it has included Nissan, Toyota, VW, Chevy etc etc etc.

In reference to your musings about the Mazda 6. I haven't had a chance to really flog on one, but when C&D did at its introduction, they noted that it FELT like it was much more responsive and faster, but that the
Accord actually would have been travelling much faster, and was more composed over the same track.

That isn't a knock against the 6 by any means, I actually like those cars, but it is indicitive that sometime setup can be misleading.

You also seem to be holding the CG against the CM. You can't drive a CG and make a fair judgement about the CM. Period. They are nothing alike.

The CG was decent in its own right, and it was what the midsize market wanted at the time. Luxury and smoothness with plenty of power. With the CM, Honda started heading back in the direction that the CA was originally so loved for. Driver involvement, responsiveness, and fun to drive. They actually started to really go down the luxury and isolation route with the CB. Luckily, it was still engaging enough to not lose the fun with the luxury. The CD had less fun, less responsiveness and more luxury. The CG was further down the path than the CD. The CG was a good car, but I thought Honda had lost some direction too. It had become too much like the Camry, and it did things that I don't expect Hondas to do, like wander a bit at highway speeds, and really really heel over in turns.

That isn't the case with the CM. I know because I have owned/driven EVERY generation of Accord. Everyone on this board mostly has assumed that it is just a bigger fatter CG. It just isn't true. It will run circles around every previous Accord and coddles while doing it. I have no problem with that.

I don't get the weight stigma either. It weighs LESS than the 330i, the 530i, the G35, the IS350, and many others that are considered "so hot" in the handling dept. Yes, they are set up more aggressively, and yes they are RWD, which does have some dynamic benefits, but if that much weight can be hearded around, then it can be hearded around, and like I said, dynamically for 99% of the population, there isn't that much difference, if any.

The CB was never a super comfortable on long drives for five people car. I have trouble with average sized guys in the back for more than 10 or 20 minutes, so again I don't see the logic in the size comparison.

I don't like their trend away from the little specialty models either, and everybody bitches about it, but the fact of the matter was that in most cases, demand for those cars dried up. They have proven that they are adept at providing what the market wants, when they want it. If they can build a niche car for a market that helps their image and bottom line they do. The S2000 is a niche car. The TL-S is a niche car. Even today, their product fold is actually full of them.

It is hard to criticize them for cutting the Prelude when they were having trouble selling 20,000 of them per year. It isn't like they didn't try to make it work. The market dried up. Continuing production of a car when there is no market is not only stupid, it is guaranteed suicide.

The Element is a niche vehicle.

The Civic Si's are niche vehicles

The Accord V6 6 speeds are niche vehicles, they just aren't separate models. The only really seperate models that were, are the CRX, the Del Sol, and the Prelude. Everything else was a mainstream derivative. The market dried up for those three, so they moved on as any logical company would do.

There never has been a niche "fun to drive Accord" really, and the Civic SI's are everybit of the youthful fun cars they always have been. They are by far the fastest, most powerful, and most capable Civics thus far.