[TRAE MYERS]

I drove the type-s and there is no
comparison. The interior is much
nicer and it has alot more features.
It beats the IS by 1.5 seconds 0-60.
The shifter is alot better. Only thing
the IS has is looks and a $6000 price
increase. FLAME AWAY!!!!!!!!

 

[tony]

I saw a CL Type-S on the road the other day, very nice, I suppose. Big wheels, nice dual exhaust tips...

But it's FWD and only has two doors.


------------------
Tony
'01 Spectra Blue

 

[oneeyejack]

this is one post to IGNORE!!!!!!

you sometimes wonder why ppl like this post things like this? i think we've had PLENTY of discussions about the IS vs the A4, 3 series and the CL-S. if you want to flame...start a war on another board...NOT THIS ONE!

 

[brad]

Hmm, 0-60 in 5.6? Gee, did you add a Type R sticker on that CL-S to achieve those times?

 

[TRAE MYERS]

Both tested by same magazine. acura type-s 6.4 sec is300 7.8 SLOWWWWWWWWWW!!!!!!

 

[Nick Lloyd]

The Is300 goes 0-60 in 7.1. However I saw in Sport Compact Magazine that hey timed the IS in at 7.8. But SCM is a horrible magazine anyways all of their times are so slow. The 6.4 sec time for the CL-s I saw in Motortrend. But I saw a 6.57sec time posted on the acura website. The point is we don't really know what times to believe. Motortrend has the fastest times in their magazine and SCM has by far the slowest, following Car and Driver then Road & Track. Now if you got that info on the IS300 from motortrend I would like to know what issue. If your right about the 7.8 that would suck because a 4spd camry is only .2 secs slower(motortrend). Alot of other factors could of been involved such as the driver and driving conditions.

The IS300 looks beautiful, but dang I just want a little more bang for the buck!

 

[CodeBoy]

Trae,
There's alot more to consider than how fast it can go from 0-60. Like how hard you can corner when you get there.

Performance doesn't always mean fast. Speaking of which, the is Looks fast standing still while the cl... well it looks like what it is, a friggin' Honda Accord on steroids!!!!

The CL may be a great value in a luxury performance car but I want something that is fast, corners fast, feels fast and smells fast and thats the IS dude!!

 

[vvtipwr]

I think the CL Type-S is awesome, being the owner of a 98 GSR, I almost bought one. Interior is nice, HID, really smooth, but for 28k, I want a car that LOOKS awesome not just alright. There's not much aftermarket hype and support for it, too.

It may be faster than a IS300, but the IS300 has more tuning capability (TRD warranty-keeping tuning reliability), has 2 more doors, an instrument cluster to die for, jaw-dropping looks.

I know I would have problems looking for a reliable tuner to hook up my type-s, but with IS300, I already have the peace of mind with TRD. A TRD-supercharged IS300 should wipe off any doubts about IS300's performance.

 

[hybridkid]

That's the whole thing about the IS300...not only does it look better, but it's more nimble and Honda has a problem with having mugen parts available like toyota has trd, mazda has mazdaspeed, and nissan has nismo...All of the latter mention have parts ready to ship while us Honda/Acura boys have to worry about voiding our warranty...I like the Cl-s too...But that was until I saw the IS...Next year when the 5 speed IS comes out, the it will be right up there with the Cl-s...

 

[F=ma]

Originally posted by CodeBoy:
Trae,
There's alot more to consider than how fast it can go from 0-60. Like how hard you can corner when you get there.

While that may be true, there is no real ultimate handling test that's universal. Sure you can autocross, but only 50-100 people in the world know what times are good for that autocross... you can quote skidpad #'s and avg slalom speeds, but when it comes right down to it, handling is preferential. Some like a large very forgiving powerslide, (ala Supra), or a tight but mind numbing concentration-requiring Mid engine RWD setup (NSX, Esprit) or the AWD rally setup, (Scooby's)... once again, its up to the driver in that situation. Handling is 80% driver.

The fact that handling and suspension are much harder to quantify than straight line performance any less important, its just you must understand when some ppl tend to treat it as less.

But my real point is that I've seen you guys treat 0-60's like they were the end all be all, but when it comes to the CL Type S comparison I hear the opinions change to straight-line-isn't-everything...


Now to another point, Tell me CodeBoy just didn't say both of these things in the same post...

Performance doesn't always mean fast...

...I want something that is fast, corners fast, feels fast and smells fast and thats the IS dude!!

I'll just let that one sit there...

------------------
Kenny
3.2 TL

 

[F=ma]

Originally posted by hybridkid:
Honda has a problem with having mugen parts available like toyota has trd, mazda has mazdaspeed, and nissan has nismo...All of the latter mention have parts ready to ship while us Honda/Acura boys have to worry about voiding our warranty...

Comptech is a subsidary of Acura. Acura Dealerships will install Comptech parts, and the warranty will remain intact. Comptech is based in Compton, California. They're developing a SC for the S2000, (actually finishing that up) and moving onto a Supercharger for Honda J-blocks, (Accord V6, TL, CL). As of April (last time I emailed them) they said around 9 month's for the SC. A CL Type-S with Comptech Headers and Comptech Exhaust will push 290 hp. (Read: Same as the NSX) They also sell springs, swaybars, and a few other worthwhile performance parts.

------------------
Kenny
3.2 TL

 

[ckolsen]

Didn't know that about Comptech, thanks Kenny. My friend's fiance has a Comptech supercharger on his NSX, but the car's out of warrantee anyway.
About the CL-S, terrible headroom if you're over 6". I think a compact balanced chassis is a lot more rewarding to drive than a long, heavy FWD chassis, but the CL-S was surprisingly agile despite that major handicap. I wish it wasn't so cramped so I could at least consider buying it.

 

[dude]

Dear F=ma:

Well said!!! Couldn't have said it better myself.....

So, the conclusion is: If you like the Type-s, then go and get it....We respect everyone's opinions....

 

[profchriss]

Just don't forget how damn ugly it is!!

Even the good folks at Honda-Acura.net say this.

When one settles, one usually has good reasons.

I did see a CL on the road and liked the way it looked, then I realized it was an Accord Coupe- Whoops!!!

Best of luck and be happy, despite my deep hatred for the exterior, the CL is a slammin' car!!

 

[Johnny Blaze]

Ugggggggghhhh, i can't believe this has come up again with and idiot statement that started this all off. You're comparing a two-door sports almost luxury car to a four door luxury car almost sporty. Lexus is and has been a Luxury focused automobile manufacturer. This is their first step into the small sport/sedan market. Give them a break. For their first gen in this market, its a damn good start. The best is yet to come. I'm buying an IS for the reputation and service, not to mention the reliability. And hey, i'll be honest, its a lexus. When you tell someone you own a lexus, their facial expressions are way different than when you tell them you own an acura or honda. I also own a honda, so don't start. If someone says, "Thats not why i'm buying one!" You're lying. I can't stand ignorant ppl.

 

[Johnny Blaze]

Oh, and one more thing, you're comparing 0-60 times? The CL type-S has 260hp, compared to the IS's 215hp. Thats 45hp difference, and the times are not that far off. 1.5 isn't blowing it away, but its not close. 260hp vs 215hp? Not fair comparison. Like i said before, I hate ignorant ppl.

[This message has been edited by Johnny Blaze (edited July 08, 2000).]

 

[F=ma]

Then again Blaze, your 260hp car is $28,000, and your 215hp car costs $33,000.

I know about all the other factors, but Blaze just had to point out this fact all by itself, so I thought I had the privilege to do so as well.

------------------
Kenny
3.2 TL

 

[F=ma]

Oh yeah Blaze, as for the hp comparison with the 0-60's. The 540i runs 5.7 sec, add 120 more horsepower and it only goes .7-.8 seconds faster? For a whopping 120 hp increase?!!? geez. that's pretty weak IMO.

Works by the same comparison.

 

[ST]

Uh Kenny..I don't wanna disturb your little arguement here, but the CL-S Type S does not cost $28K. At best it is going for around $500 off MSRP for around $30K (non NAV). If you're telling me you can do better, please tell me exactly where I can get it for $28K.

I find it interestingly that everyone compares the IS against the CL instead of the 3.2TL, even yourself..an owner.

BTW> There's an old saying within the drag racing community that goes: "the faster you go, the harder it is to go faster"...

Originally posted by F=ma:
Then again Blaze, your 260hp car is $28,000, and your 215hp car costs $33,000.

I know about all the other factors, but Blaze just had to point out this fact all by itself, so I thought I had the privilege to do so as well.

 

[maxim]

Originally posted by Johnny Blaze:
Oh, and one more thing, you're comparing 0-60 times? The CL type-S has 260hp, compared to the IS's 215hp. Thats 45hp difference, and the times are not that far off. 1.5 isn't blowing it away, but its not close. 260hp vs 215hp? Not fair comparison. Like i said before, I hate ignorant ppl.

[This message has been edited by Johnny Blaze (edited July 08, 2000).]

Well, just for reference 3.2TL has 225 hp, 4 doors and 100lb heavier than IS300. M&T got recently 6.7 sec 0-60 for 00'TL. Last year R&T got 7.2 for 99'TL with 4sp. The slowest time I saw for 3.2TL was from C&D - 7.4 sec. Assuming -0.5 from 0-60 for 00TL with 5sp compare with 99TL (as acura climes) we have the same 6.7 sec from R&T for 00'TL as M&T got.

[This message has been edited by maxim (edited July 09, 2000).]