monoski

<img src="http://pictureposter.audiworld.com/11281/1audi_3acura.jpg">Got together with the family for Easter dinner and decided it was time for a family photo. Our main objective was to take a shot of the 3 TLs to send to the Acura sales guy to hang in his office - but I snuck the Audi in for a photo. All-in-all, 4 very nice cars. IMHO (and apparently my family agrees!) the TL is a great car - especially for the money. I can't wait till the TL Type S is broken in to see how it's
260 hp @ 6100 rpm & 232 ft-lbs. @ 5500 rpm compares to the 250 hp @ 5800 rpm & 258 ft-lbs. @ 1850 rpm in the 2.7. Seems pretty decent for a 31k car. I drove it briefly (pretty gently) and enjoyed it, but found the tip and engine combination nowhere near as exhilarating as the 2.7.

Anyway, hope you don't mind the somewhat off topic post. I just thought it was a cool picture.

From left to right
my Audi A6 2.7
my wifes 1999 TL
my aunts 2001 TL
my brother's and sister-in-law's 2002 TL Type S

Norcal2.7t

Is that Heather (Erica sp..) blooming in the foreground?

monoski

It's Heather - but not sure of the type - I'll have to ask my aunt!

ZCD2.7T

I stopped over at the local Acura dealer (Libertyville Acura near Chicago) on Saturday to drive the 3.2TL Type S - some obervations: 1) The car is fast, but not as responsive as the 2.7T. The comparative lack of low-RPM torque is very obvious, and would make most any "street race" with a 2.7T very quickly over - in favor of the Audi. 2) the engine has a "hard" edge to its sound - inspirational, or annoying, depending on your point of view. 3) the SportShift is much quicker to respond to manual shifting than the Tip. 4)the handling is quite good, but not really "alive", particularly in the steering, compared to the 2.7T. 5) the interior is comfortable and well-equipped, especially at the price. The in-dash 6-Disc CD changer is something Audi could take a lesson from. 6) the lack of a trunk pass-through is a major oversight, practically speaking. 7) the wheels are SHARP looking, but the rest of the styling is just OK - better than the standard 3.2, but bland. 8)Overall, it doesn't compare to the 2.7T, but at $13-15K less, comparably equipped, how could it compare?? 9) It's a BARGAIN! (relative term)
10) I'll seriously consider one when I finally decide to be done with my 142,000 mile '94 Legend.

Bollinger

But I thought you could get a pass through. I was speccing on the other day. No rear folding seat though.

A very good car if it's the market you are after. I'm not impressed with the interior though. It's straight Accord with ugly wood in all the wrong places.

I'm also disappointed to hear about the engine, but not in the least surprised. Any one have a 0-60 and 1/4 time for it yet?

All in all a very good car for the price. A friend of mine is probably about 60% likely to get one. He'd be more likely if it came in more colors.

ZCD2.7T

Motor Trend came up with 6.28 0-60, and 14.7 @97mph in the 1/4 mile. Pretty quick, no? Especially with an automatic....

Bollinger

CL-S runs about a 6.4 and 14.8 according to Motor Trend. Most mags didn't do that well, being around a 6.7 and 15.2. And the TL-S weighs 50lbs more.

Still, the numbers do sound almost right, even if they are off a little. Some testing variance is to be expected.

Even if it runs a couple ticks higher in each case, it's quite a mover for an auto and for that price.

Thanks for the numbers.