Has anyone jet piloted a ACURA TSX?

[tuffAC]

Was wondering if anyone has test driven a TSX. If there is any difference in comfort levels, performance, suspension etc. I know yanks prefer their suspensions softer than ours. Fuel RON are better around the world compared to Aus. Unfortunately we still have to source parts from USA and JDM and was wondering since our PULP RON are somewhat lower compared to the rest of the world, would sourcing aftermaket parts for our aus euro affect the performance given the fact that those parts were tuned to run higher RON. :rolleyes:

[yfin]

According to hondatech - our 98 ron fuel in Australia is better than what they have in the USA in terms of what power can be produced for the Euro.

http://www.hondatech.com.au/forum/showthread.php?t=230

[aaronng]

And according to vtec.net, the TSX's suspension is stiffer than that of the Euro R!
Source: http://www.vtec.net/articles/view-article?page_number=5&article_id=75679

[Tobster]

According to hondatech - our 98 ron fuel in Australia is better than what they have in the USA in terms of what power can be produced for the Euro.

http://www.hondatech.com.au/forum/showthread.php?t=230
I don't really trust some of those statements by Hondatech. I believe the US fuel rating system is actually quite different to ours -- and their 91 is actually about the equivalent of our 98. If you read some of the posts on the TSX boards, people there have access to a vastly greater range of fuel ratings.

[aaronng]

I think their 91 is equivalent to our 95. Why? Take the TSX. It runs on 91 (US) and can do 88 for short durations. The engine has 10.5:1 compression. Our Euro has the same 10.5:1 and runs on 95 (AUS) and can fall back to 91 for short durations.

Hondatech's statement is with regards to our 98. The way they tested is probably to advance the cam timing until knocking occurred. So what they are saying is with regards to advancing the timing. There are bad petrols that knock eventhough they say 98.

[Tobster]

I wasn't sure exactly -- I just knew they didn't directly correspond. Of course, despite the compression ratios, we still get the detuned engine instead of the 147 kW version that the rest of the world gets!

At least it shouldn't be hard to get a factory power gain for the 2006 model! :)

[aaronng]

I wasn't sure exactly -- I just knew they didn't directly correspond. Of course, despite the compression ratios, we still get the detuned engine instead of the 147 kW version that the rest of the world gets!

At least it shouldn't be hard to get a factory power gain for the 2006 model! :)
It's not really detuned. It's an engine with a slightly different ECU. In Japan, they sell both the 147kW and 140kW Accord Euro (without the Euro of course). The 147kW goes into the FWD model while the 140kW goes into the 4WD model. I guess Honda Aus wanted the 140kW so that later on they could advertise a power bump to 147kW and get us to upgrade!

[PNR888]

I don't really trust some of those statements by Hondatech. I believe the US fuel rating system is actually quite different to ours -- and their 91 is actually about the equivalent of our 98. If you read some of the posts on the TSX boards, people there have access to a vastly greater range of fuel ratings.


we surely have different octane rating to USA/Canada rating..
According to a post in a previous thread.
in AUS.. we use RON = Reseach Octane Number
In USA.. the number they show = (RON + Motor Octane Number) / 2

MON is always lower than RON, so average out, Yank's gas stations show lower octane number..

[aaronng]

Modern fuels are said to have a (RON-MON) = 10. (Source) (http://www.faqs.org/faqs/autos/gasoline-faq/part3/preamble.html) So our 98 RON should have a MON of 88. So (98+88)/2 = 93 PON (Pump octane number). Our 98RON is the equivalent of USA's 93PON octane. And our 95RON is equal to (95+85)/2 = 90PON. Finally, our 91RON is equal to (91+81)/2 = 86PON.

So in conclusion, if the statement that RON-MON = 10 for modern fuels as claimed by faqs.org is true, then:
Australia <=> US
98 = 93
95 = 90
91 = 86

In the US, they have 87, 89, 91 and 93. And 91PON is the minimum for the TSX, so that should be similar if not slightly above our 95RON while 87PON is what is recommended for cars that take regular petrol there (regular cars here are recommended to fill 91RON). So I think that our petrol is very similar to what the US has. Just that their numbers are lower while we get higher numbers. But essentially they have the same knock resistance.

One advantage we have is that our 98 PULP are supposedly ethanol-free, while the 93PON in US contains ethanol. Why does it contain ethanol? Because ethanol is an octane booster! Supposedly 10% ethanol results in a 3 point increase in PON! (Source) (http://www.michigan.gov/mda/0,1607,7-125-1566_1733_23370-63247--,00.html)

[yfin]

One advantage we have is that our 98 PULP are supposedly ethanol-free, while the 93PON in US contains ethanol.

And that is what Hondatech was saying - the zero ethanol allowed more aggressive tuning

[sodaz]

Wouldn't it be cool if we had 100RON fuel here like in Japan?

[aaronng]

Wouldn't it be cool if we had 100RON fuel here like in Japan?
And it'll be more expensive! :) damn fuel prices.