by "awmaster10" (awmaster10)
Published 12/27/2017 at 10:47
by "awmaster10" (awmaster10)
Published 12/27/2017 at 10:47
Tags: Honda
; Civic
; civic type r
; Acura
STARS: 0
I was finally starting to look past the horrific styling and recognize how well packaged it is, how cavernous the trunk opening is, and how pretty the paint color is. I should have left it at that, but thinking a brand new car turbo HAS to be pretty good to drive, I took it for a spin.
The steering and overall handling are good, but only marginally better than the k24 accord coupe he replaced. The engine was supposed to be the highlight of the experience, and I hoped it would be a bit like my 98 s70 GLT AWD but way better since you know... 20 years of progress. Wrong. Zero character, upsetting sound, and would you look at that? Less hp and torque than the old white block Volvo motor.
Dumb and unfair comparison as well but the TL is better in every single way, liftback being the only exception. Blah blah blah way higher msrp when new blah blah has lots of miles. My point isn’t that nobody should buy a new civic because an old Acura is better(it is), I just can’t get over how much better the steering feels in the old TL. Don’t even get me started on the looks, interior AND a exterior...
Pops loves a good row your own, but sadly he didn’t like the rev hang or the way it behaved in general, and wanted my mom to be able to drive it in an emergency. I tried my hardest but couldn’t get him to try a super clean low mileage 3rd gen TL type S. I Know for a fact he would love it since it’s just his old accord but with better everything, but he wanted a new car and I can’t blame him.
Enough of my dumb used car comparisons and all that though, the car is solid, quick enough, and handles better than most new compacts, so if the turbo motor proves to be Honda-reliable, I think he scored just what he wanted. My mom’s 2012(?) Altima is infinitely worse, so maybe I’ll influence them more on that replacement when it comes time.
"jvirgs drives a Subaru" (jvirgs)
12/27/2017 at 11:14, STARS: 2
OMG the bookstore parking lot!
"awmaster10" (awmaster10)
12/27/2017 at 11:19, STARS: 0
Yes! Good eye. There are prettier places on campus to take pictures but I thought the snow and GLC in the background looked nice enough
"jvirgs drives a Subaru" (jvirgs)
12/27/2017 at 11:22, STARS: 1
Funny thing is I spend more time in the GLC as an undergrad than I did as a grad student there. haha
And for the sake of staying on topic, nothing about the new civic makes me want to drive one. Even the Type R has me all MEH....
"awmaster10" (awmaster10)
12/27/2017 at 11:31, STARS: 1
I take all graduate and one undergrad course and never spend time in glc but as a freshman undergrad I had Econ in glc and studied and ate lunch there a ton.
And yeah very meh worthy but the type r is probably a blast on the track
"Jordan and the Slowrunner, Boomer Intensifies" (jordanwphillips)
12/27/2017 at 11:33, STARS: 3
Oh the humanity, an economy based 1.5t has less power than a not economy based 2.5(?)t engine from a premium brand. Power from turbo engines hasn’t went up a huge amount(with the exception of a few), but reliability and usability have. Character isn’t generally wanted from the public out of an engine, and that’s what you get. I understand you expected more from something labeled “Sport”, but it’s just a trim, Honda doesn’t really advertise it as much more than that.
"Wrong Wheel Drive (41%)" (rduncan5678)
12/27/2017 at 11:38, STARS: 2
I think its perfectly fair to compare it to a used TL. If the brand new car is in every way worse than the used one, then there is no point in buying the new one. Having to have a “new car” is such a silly requirement MANY people have. I understand not wanting a 20 year old car with 200k miles but finding a nice 5-10 year old example of a car with under 100k on it that has been well taken care of is such a good idea. Sure you might run into maintenance, but even if you do NONE of it yourself, you still come out ahead depending on the car. Even new cars require maintenance, its just covered under a warranty that you paid out the ass in depreciation to get. I just cannot comprehend why people avoid used cars like the plague. Maybe its because cars used to not make it to 100k without transmission replacements and other major repairs? It seems like 200k is the standard without any sort of quality maintenance nowadays.
"awmaster10" (awmaster10)
12/27/2017 at 11:41, STARS: 1
20 years. TWENTY.
"Jordan and the Slowrunner, Boomer Intensifies" (jordanwphillips)
12/27/2017 at 12:07, STARS: 3
And again, a liter of difference, and cheaper maintenance and likely the ability to run on 87. This engine is in no way about performance, it’s about meeting emissions requirements. Too many people fail to understand this.
"Jake - Has Bad Luck So You Don't Have To" (murdersofa)
12/27/2017 at 12:15, STARS: 2
Economy engine in an economy car drives like an economy car. I do not get the surprise here.
"DAWRX - The Herb Strikes Back" (karsonkinja)
12/27/2017 at 12:16, STARS: 0
Because the average person isn’t on top of maintenance nor do they treat their cars well. So when 100k rolls around, huge surprise, it has a laundry list of things that need to be addressed, perhaps some of those things are major.
Enter “I don’t want to buy a used car, my 2011 Chrysler 200 (just an example) needed $3000 of work by 100k, mechanics are such a ripoff”
The above is usually invalidated if the car to be purchased is a luxury car, the badge trumps all other problems.
"Jake - Has Bad Luck So You Don't Have To" (murdersofa)
12/27/2017 at 12:16, STARS: 1
Yeah but it’s an economy car. Vs a luxury car. “Chevy spark worse than 90s LS400" omfg so profound
"awmaster10" (awmaster10)
12/27/2017 at 12:19, STARS: 0
Well is the k24 not a fair comparison? Sure, I compared it to two (ancient) non economy engines but I think people are missing the fact that I’m directly comparing it to a 2006 economy car of the same make.
"interstate366, now In The Industry" (interstate366)
12/27/2017 at 12:21, STARS: 1
I figured these were pretty boring to drive. For a better comparison to the TL, I kinda like the styling of the TLX, but the rollaway issues they had have me steering clear of ever owning one.
"awmaster10" (awmaster10)
12/27/2017 at 12:29, STARS: 0
My generation of TL is light and nimble but apparently the SH-AWD makes the newer TL and TLX much better balanced. I should drive one and do a quick comparison
"awmaster10" (awmaster10)
12/27/2017 at 12:52, STARS: 0
Well if you read the last paragraph i acknowledged that these comparisons aren’t super valid. The comparison to the more than 10 year old k24 isn’t fair enough for you?
Also, I’d consider the j series pretty much an economy engine since it’s in at least 5 base model Honda’s. A 1998 performance 6cyl is worse than most modern economy v6es, and I don’t see the problem in expecting progress in more than One category after 20 years which is a massive amount of time from car development. If pony cars can more than double their output in that time you’d think Honda could just do a little better. Most reviews of the new non SI civic seem to agree but because I mentioned two *near* luxury cars (and acknowledged the unfair comparison) my findings are suddenly invalid because economy cars are automatically above drivetrain criticism?
Drive one for yourself
"interstate366, now In The Industry" (interstate366)
12/27/2017 at 13:39, STARS: 1
I want to put a TLX body on a manual 4th gen TL SH-AWD. That would just be perfect.
"awmaster10" (awmaster10)
12/27/2017 at 14:10, STARS: 0
Yeah having shawd with a crisp Honda 6 speed would be awesome but damn the 4th gen TL is so ugly and bulbous
"Wrong Wheel Drive (41%)" (rduncan5678)
12/27/2017 at 19:59, STARS: 0
Of course, a poorly maintained car is an issue at any mileage. Thats why buying a used car with maintenance history is always my number one priority. If there is no history of maintenance, then it is assumed that nothing has been done and that the car will be a nightmare. I would gladly buy a car with 150k+ and extensive history than one with 75k and no history at all. I do not understand why dealers don’t keep better track of maintenance history. I think a car should be totally illegal to sell without it.
"Wrong Wheel Drive (41%)" (rduncan5678)
12/27/2017 at 20:01, STARS: 1
But is an Acura really a luxury car? I mean the TL is just a tarted up accord anyways. Surely a more fair comparison would be a similar vintage Accord sport with all the options. But really its still the same car (space and amenities wise) versus the new civic. So the old Acura blowing the new honda away says something.
"bob and john" (bobandjohn)
12/27/2017 at 21:09, STARS: 1
A lot of work has gone into it that you DONT see.
1: emissions. Have you seen the difference in emissions standards in the past 10 years? Let alone 20.
2: actual usable power
3: reliability.
And thats before we get into production costs.
Also the k24 was designed as a sporty..er motor. The 1.5 wasnt.
"awmaster10" (awmaster10)
12/27/2017 at 21:40, STARS: 0
I really don’t think my post can be taken to mean there has been zero progress or that I have no clue why they designed this motor. I noted things I didn’t like about it compared to another entry level Honda from two generations ago.
1. Sure, when did I say anything about emissions? Good for them!
2. Never said it didn’t have enough usable power
3. The k24 is bulletproof and time will tell, but I doubt this new turbo motor will be any MORE reliable.
4(?). Who cares if the k24 is semi sporty? I’m comparing two comparable cars from the same manufacturer with a 10 year gap in technology. And production cost? I’m going to need some figures to back that up because even ignoring the huge tooling cost to go from a well established block to a new design, I’m not sure that this motor would be cheaper to make than an old Honda 4cyl N/A.
Jesus man, can’t make a couple observations on a car without hearing endless bullshit about how I should basically expect the absolute worst out of every economy car.
Again, have you driven the previous gen and the new car? I have, and presented my opinion, and I don’t really think it was that harsh to warrant being lectured on how an economy motor should perform. I didn’t make these observations in a vacuum, I’ve driven (last gen) competitors from most manufacturers.
Seriously, go drive one yourself and let me know how you feel about it.
"bob and john" (bobandjohn)
12/27/2017 at 23:07, STARS: 0
I did.
Its a AtoB car. Its good at doing car things. It does it cheap and without bitching. I didnt go in expecting a Ek type r hatch, i went in expecting more of a 2003 corolla.
You want a fun to drive car? Got get a civic type r. You know, the one that was made to be fun?
"awmaster10" (awmaster10)
12/27/2017 at 23:43, STARS: 0
my point is if you don’t hold economy cars to any standard at all they will never improve. Why would you expect a 2003 economy car experience out of a 2017 economy car? Is it so absurd to compare a brand new economy car to an extremely old non economy car (not sports cars were talking about. Just regular sedans in the class slightly above economy). A new pony car can destroy old proper sports cars around a track and in a straight line. A new GTI can beat an old proper sports car. A new half ton truck can haul like an old 3/4 ton. Are economy cars just expected to not progress?
I’ve owned a couple cars that weren’t made to be fun but had redeeming qualities.
- Chrysler 300m: raucous and unknown 3.5 v6 that ran with the likes of the vq35. Way less body roll than it should have had considering how smooth the ride was.
- 3g 4Runner: handling in low grip situations in rwd mode makes you feel like a Baja driver.
-r50 pathfinder: almost as fast as the civic in a straight line in an off-road capable suv from 2001. carlike handling for an SUV of its size.
- Volvo s70 glt: brutal turbo kick, faster to 60 than the civic, crazy wet weather grip.
- 02 maxima m/t: faster than Civic, row your own, more comfortable seats and interior ergonomics.
- his old accord coupe: revs to the sky, smooth, sounds nicer, great driving position, more attractive interior
Of course a new economy car doesn’t need to have a bunch of random positive traits from older cars from different classes. I just think it’s dumb to only be able to criticize the dynamics of the absolute top of the line performance model. If somebody reviews a gti do you deem it pointless because they didn’t drive the R, the fun one? What about a 328i? Is it allowed to be lackluster just because it’s not the m3, the fun one?
And to be clear I didn’t go into this expecting a damn sports car. I drive a gussied up accord. If I were to say I wish the TL had RWD, would that be an invalid complaint because it’s not supposed to be a fun sports car? No. Maybe just expect more since a ton of other cars have come a very long way since 1998.