Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





2009 Acura TL vs Hyundai Genesis

skgolferskgolfer Posts: 17
edited April 27 in Acura
Just wondering if anyone else has ended up in the same place. Looking at both the Acura and the Hyundai. Very impressed by both. TL Base vs 3.8 Genesis with Premium Package are virtually the same price. What to do?

Comments

  • cviz821cviz821 Posts: 12
    I test drove the 2008 TL and sat in the 2009 TL. The Genesis by far is a larger car with more legroom front and rear. I did not like how clutered that TL steering wheel and dash were. The Genesis was my choice and I'm extremely happy about the decision.

    The Genesis was much quieter inside than the TL. While that TL handled well I was extremely disappointed with the ride.
  • keithlkeithl Posts: 106
    I come from owning 5 of the 04-08 Acura TL. And was planning on buying an 09 until I saw it. I have loved the look of the Genesis since I first saw the ads last year. I have drvien the 09 TL on several test drives as well as the Genesis 3.8 with Nav. Interestingly enough I beleive these are both headed for same market, Acura is pushing TL toward bigger luxury segment. Acura refinement is right up there with Lexus. Acura technology is second to none, thei Nav is the best in the business and their voice command interaction is also the best. That being said I do not like the 09 TL styling, it does nto flow, it looks liek the car was designed in 3 distinct sections with no continuity. The Genesis is a great first attempt by hyundai at a luxury car. Some thinngs I noticed were that te ride coudl be a bit more behaved, I wish they offered maybe a Sport model with a better suspensiona nd steering, not to be a real sports drive, but something better than the slightly loose feeling ride the Genesis has. The inteiros is real nice, although the exposed slanted nav will suffer glare frequently. The hi-res nav is excellent again only edged out by Acura. The Genesis voice commands are good, but the lag time for processing each prompt seems slow for a HD based system. I guess the processing power is lacking. The interior seating again begs for a sport model with better more supportive seats. They shoudl mimic Infinit and have a Sport model that has tighter steering, slightly better tighter suspension and more supportive seats and maybe a slightly better wheel look. The 09 TL vs. 3.8 Genesis is a tought one, the Genesis styling is very MB/Lexus like while the TL is well just odd. The thing hurting the Genesis will be well, its a Hyundai! Don;t get me wrong my family has 3 Hyundais' all rock solid, but if I spend $40K I want to be in a slitghly more upscale dealership and service department, not sitting next to the Elantra guy getting his beater fixed. I know they can;t start a new brand and be successful, but they shodul have made some sort of qualification for a dealership to carry them. Also I find the dealers are very arrogant with the Genesis. They feel they have a winner on their hands and are acting like MB or Lexus used to, being cocky and wanting MSRP for their car. Best deal I have seen is $1K over invoice, that is too much in today's beaten and crushed car market. I should be able to get it at invoice or invoice +$500.Also note that here in ATL all dealers charge $600 (yes $600) DOC fee, so that is more profit for them.
  • carolinabobcarolinabob Posts: 520
    I have had salespeople offer a V-6 with tech for 3,000-5,000 off MSRP in the SC and GA areas. This was in phone conversations based on e-mails to them. Try Augusta.
  • cebtebcebteb Posts: 138
    Might depend on where you live. If you live where there is winter ice and snow like I do (metro-Denver), and you want to drive this car in that weather, then you wouldn't even consider a rear wheel drive car like the Hyundai Genesis. If they put it in AWD, then it would be a competitor, otherwise, it is a warm weather car. I looked at the Hyundai Azera (FWD), but while it meets the near luxury standard, its performance pales next to the TL.
  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Posts: 4,228
    Wouldn't snow tires go a long way toward compensating for RWD vs. FWD? Of course, AWD would be best in winter weather conditions, and FWD with snow tires would be second best to AWD with all seasons.
  • cebtebcebteb Posts: 138
    If you're in the flatlands in heavy snow, snow tires on a RWD car will make it usable in winter. Of course the noise and rougher ride of snow tires on dry pavement is a bother. But, even with snow tires, RWD cars will fishtail pulling away from a stop and going around corners or sharp turns. If you have any grades to climb in your area, RWD, even with snow tires, will really struggle to get you up the grade and God forbid traffic stops you on the grade and you have to start again.

    Here in the front range in Colorado, there are lots of grades to drive w/o even venturing into the mountains, so RWD cars are basically summer cars unless you want to use chains (bad idea) or studded snow tires (not legal many places and really lousy to ride on). FWD with all season tires is about the minimum for winter driving here.
  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Posts: 4,228
    Going up grades RWD gains relative to FWD because the weight shifts to the rear. This happens with both configurations, of course, but the upshot is that additional weight shifts to the drive wheels with RWD, but weight shifts off the drive wheels with FWD. FWD may still retain an advantage over RWD, going uphill, but the advantage is diminished. I imagine at some degree of incline, depending on the wight distribution of the cars being compared and other factors, FWD loses its traction advantage over RWD. In fact, on a fairly steep incline, RWD may actually have better traction than FWD. It's possible, though, that at the degree of incline required for this to happen neither RWD nor FWD can climb the grade.

    Equipping FWD with winter tires should be adequate for most winter driving situations, but your driving needs may indeed require AWD.
  • pafromflpafromfl Posts: 47
    RWD cars will fishtail pulling away from a stop and going around corners or sharp turns.
    Traction and stability control has pretty much fixed those problems. The advantage of FWD cars is that many of them have a 60/40 weight distribution that gives more traction to the drive wheels. If you put 1000 lbs in the trunk of a 2 ton RWD drive car, you can achieve the equivalent 40/60 ratio (not that I would recommend doing that). Of course a 60/40 weight distribution typically induces horrible understeer that degrades cornering ability, but is safer for poor drivers.
  • cebtebcebteb Posts: 138
    Every winter on a snow day I see all those RWD buggies trying to climb a city street hill in Arvada, CO just 3 blocks from my house. Most don't make it and try to find some detour that will get them on a street heading south with a only a gradual grade. I've been here since '77 and have owned/driven 2 RWD cars and 4 FWD cars (plus a couple of SUV) through winters here and to the mountain ski areas. RWD just doesn't cut it here.

    My first bad experience with a RWD here was in 1980 when I ended up doing a 360 on the transition from I225 to I70 during morning rush hour. God was with me as no one hit me. Had an '85 RWD Nissan 300ZX Turbo in winter driving from '85 through '91 with snow tires and sometime light chains. Chains damaged my wheel wells. Had to abandon my car during a snow storm on a local road. No RWD for me here except maybe as a summer car only.

    Final note, our local newspaper's auto column guy (been in the car business since the 50s) was testing a high priced, European, luxury sedan a couple of years ago in the winter and ripped them in his review because they couldn't get the car out of his driveway due to the slick surface. He ended up getting a different brand vehicle to test that week for his Saturday Drive column.
  • cebtebcebteb Posts: 138
    No true. See my comment above about the failed test of a high priced, European luxury sedan (RWD) by a professional tester in metro-Denver.

    The weight over the drive wheels and the stability of pulling instead of pushing is what make FWD superior to RWD in slick and/or snowy conditions. My first FWD car was a '91 Oldsmobile Omega V6. I know it was a POC, but during the 4 years and 82K miles that it lasted, it pulled me through metro-Denver during the great storm of Christmas 1982. I drove all across town, maybe 40 miles past stuff city buses and delivery trucks as well as hundreds of cars without a problem. My journey didn't end until a quarter mile from my house where I high-centered it in over 3 feet of snow.

    As my wife always says when the manufacturers come out with another new RWD car, "why do they keep trying to sell those "California" cars in the snow belt and in Colorado". I guess life's lessons need to be relearned by each generation.
  • pafromflpafromfl Posts: 47
    No true. See my comment above about the failed test of a high priced, European luxury sedan (RWD) by a professional tester in metro-Denver.
    It is likely that the expensive European sedan wore summer performance tires and had a 50/50 weight distribution. Traction and stability control would have subdued fishtailing if the car ever got enough traction to move. To operate a heavy high-performance (i.e. RWD) car in snow, you need all-season or winter tires. More weight in the trunk yields better traction at the expense of handling.
  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Posts: 4,228
    "More weight in the trunk yields better traction at the expense of handling."

    It also reduces fuel economy and tire wear. I'd consider chains before extra weight. If RWD offers insufficient traction on a frequent basis, then FWD or AWD should be considered.

    The important factor to consider when selecting a car is that every drive configuration has significant tradeoffs. Therefore, each configuration is a compromise. All too often, buyers don't match their driving requirements with the attributes and drawbacks of the available configurations, and end up with a poor choice.

    Incidentally, I lived in Wisconsin for many years, so I'm very familiar with winter driving conditions. Unlike Colorado, however, Wisconsin has hills, but no mountains.
  • kdshapirokdshapiro Posts: 5,751
    Final note, our local newspaper's auto column guy (been in the car business since the 50s) was testing a high priced, European, luxury sedan a couple of years ago in the winter and ripped them in his review because they couldn't get the car out of his driveway due to the slick surface. He ended up getting a different brand vehicle to test that week for his Saturday Drive column.

    Sounds to me like the guy that's been in the business 50 years doesn't know that snow tires were needed. I have generally seen where RWD with snows can't make it up and incline neither can FWD with all-seasons. And I have seen plenty of FWD spin out in the winter. On ice, all bets are off.

    I drove a European sports sedan for a few years in the snow with all-season tires. I never fishtailed or got stuck.

    Where you live it sounds like the vehicle of choice is a 4WD Jeep or equivalent. Forget FWD, RWD and AWD.
  • cebtebcebteb Posts: 138
    The professional car tester I referred to gets his test cars and trucks from the dealers, distributors, and factory promotions, he doesn't buy the car and put the tires on. He gets them in the same shape you get them. The car that wouldn't go up the driveway had all season radials.

    I currently drive an on-demand AWD SUV while the wife drives a '99 Chrysler 300M (FWD). We get around quite nicely in winter with all season radials. No we don't try to drive in 3 feet of fresh snow like we get here about every 5 years or so, but 6" of fresh or the standard "icy and snow packed roads" don't give us any problems even on fairly steep inclines.

    In another post I described my cross-town drive after one of our record snow storms in December '82 in my first FWD car ('81 Citation). No problems until I finally high centered it in over 3 feet of fresh snow and that was with all season radials. The weight over the drive wheels makes all the difference.

    Those, like you, who like to believe that the problems of RWD in winter driving have some how been miraculously solved are doomed on our roads in winter to either not going at all or getting started and then getting stuck or ending up in the ditches along the road shoulders. FWD isn't a panacea, but it is much better in winter here than any RWD.

    I've been on the front range in Colorado since '77 and I grew up in Chicago during the 50s and 60s, so I'm well aware of winter driving issues both in the flatlands and where their are hills and mountains to climb (I'm a skier, so I hit the mountains frequently in the winter).

    My wife is from So-Cal and has been here since '86. She had her own winter adventures here with California cars on Colorado winter roads and she'd never let me replace her 300M with a RWD car no matter how nice it looked unless I bought it for her to use as a summer car only. Not likely on my pension and SS and her small paycheck. I showed her the Hyundai Genesis at the auto show in April and told her about all the high praise and buzz the car was getting. She thought it looked nice, but then asked about the drive wheels. RWD, she didn't even bother to get into the display model. She's kind of zeroed in on the Acura TL now and we will have to wait until her test drives before we know if it will be FWD or AWD, as she doesn't like a really firm ride.
  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Posts: 4,228
    Good, explanation!

    How has your overall experience been with the 300M? In '99 my wife and I debated between a 300M and a TL, and decided on the TL. We've never regretted our decision, but the 300M had some attributes over the TL, such as interior roominess and a large trunk. I rented a 300M once, and it drove well.
  • kdshapirokdshapiro Posts: 5,751
    Those, like you, who like to believe that the problems of RWD in winter driving have some how been miraculously solved are doomed on our roads in winter to either not going at all or getting started and then getting stuck or ending up in the ditches along the road shoulders. FWD isn't a panacea, but it is much better in winter here than any RWD.

    Someone needs driving lessons. I drove a RWD car with snows, without TC in Buffalo for 3 years. I know all about driving in the snow with RWD and snow tires. Clearly FWD with all-seasons due to weight distribution is better than RWD with all-seasons. Put snows on the RWD, it's a different story.

    In my neighboorhood some of the houses have steep driveways. One neighboor has a 3 series, which has snows in the winter and an Accord. After a storm a couple of years ago, I laughed (silently) as I drove by the house. The Accord and 3 series were both at the bottom of the driveway. I've also seen FWD cars have trouble making a particular turn up a steep incline in my development. I had no problem in my 3 series with (new) all-seasons, however AWD/4WD climb that incline like they have nails in the tires.

    These days I need to drive my car in any weather without worrying about getting stuck so I drive an AWD.

    So your experience is not my experience and we can agree to disagree. /ot
  • carolinabobcarolinabob Posts: 520
    While snow driving is important, this topic is supposed to be about comparing the Genesis to the Acura TL OVERALL, not about RWD vs. FWD/AWD and driving in snow.
    These are the top two cars I am comparing right now, so more information on how they compare would be appreciated.
    Thanks,
  • cebtebcebteb Posts: 138
    I think I was trying to communicate that unless you live in the Sun Belt, the Genesis and TL aren't directly comparable. The TL in either FWD or AWD is a better choice for an everyday car if you live in an area with significant winter driving issues.

    If you live in a warm weather climate, then other factors come into play. Consumer Reports likes the Genesis better than the TL, but notes that Acura has a much better reliability record than Hyundai. Read the CR issue (last November I think) where both cars were tested along with the road tests here on Edmonds.

    CR has some issues with the TL that are valid (small trunk), could be an issue to some (little steering feel w/ electronic steering; however, could this type of steering be the norm in a few years / typical Honda/Acura road noise), and aren't supported by looking at the car yourself (back seat room and comfort; I thought is was a big upgrade over the prior TL, but CR thought it wasn't as good).

    CR's main issue with the Genesis is ride quality, calling it unsettled, whatever that means. Guess you need to test drive it to see whether it is an issue for you. It can be had with a lot more power than the TL, but both the basic engine and large engine get poorer mileage than the TL. It is roomier than the TL if you think the TL is too small. Roominess can be objective and subjective. I think the 2009 TL is a lot roomier than the earlier versions and a lot roomier than either the Infinity G37 or Cadillac CTS, but others might disagree. Go sit in a TL and a Genesis and decide for yourself if roominess is a factor.

    Finally, if winter driving, gas mileage, reliability, and maybe ride aren't factors to you, then I think you can get a lot more car for the money with the Genesis.
  • cebtebcebteb Posts: 138
    How has your overall experience been with the 300M? In '99 my wife and I debated between a 300M and a TL, and decided on the TL. We've never regretted our decision, but the 300M had some attributes over the TL, such as interior roominess and a large trunk. I rented a 300M once, and it drove well.

    Well, it has been a 10 year love/hate relationship with the 300M. On the love side is still the exterior and interior look of the prior generation 300M. We still get looks in a parking lot when it is shined up. Also love the interior appointments and design and the huge trunk. Very comfortable and roomy. Power is more than adequate and the tranny is very smooth shifting for only a 4-speed automatic. It handles very nicely as well on a winding road at speed.

    On the hate side is the ride. Way too firm. My 2003 Olds Bravada SUV rides much smoother and it's a truck (it does have air springs in the rear though). Also, road noise is very prominent. As I understand it though, these issues were addressed and improved on in later years, so a 2002 or so 300M should ride smoother and be quieter inside.

    Mechanical faults started with the stock BadYear tires. Most were defective and no amount of the most sophisticated balancing could keep them from wobbling. We put some Yoko's on it and that finally solved the tire problem at about 20K miles. Then there is the strut mounts. We are on our third set in front, second in back (under 50K miles). They just break and crumble causing a serious ride impairment. We have a good shop for the third set and they are using high quality after market parts, so I think this is finally fixed. Then the brake rotors. After warping the originals and their Mopar replacements, we went with some Brembo high end rotors last year and solved that problem.

    So you can see why I say love/hate. But, even if everything with the tires and struts is as good as it gets, the ride is still way too firm and the cabin has way too much road noise.
  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Posts: 4,228
    Thanks for your response to my questions.

    I didn't notice the excessive road noise in the one I rented. Nor did my wife and I find the ride objectionable, but the one we rented for a couple of days of mixed driving was an '03 or '04. My then the insulation and ride may have been refined.
  • choe13choe13 Posts: 348
    Compare the TL with the lexus ES, cadillac mkz and other fwd cars. The genesis is made on a more expensive rwd architechture. I think people are trying to pick to find a fault on the genesis which is its stiff suspension system that gives it some sporty characteristics. If you think the genesis suspension/ride is unsettling try a bmw 5 series through a pothole

    I really like the new TL when i test drove it but it was just not a rwd car. To those that care it is a big difference
  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Posts: 4,228
    "...cadillac mkz..."

    Fyi, there's a Cadillac CTS and STS, but no MKZ. However, there's a Lincoln MKZ.
  • joe97joe97 Posts: 2,248
    More reasons why luxury models, espeically, should stop using alpha/alpha-numeric, especially random letter/number combination. How hard is it to come up with a model name, like the Genesis? The TL is a great car as well, but what is a TL?
  • billyperks2billyperks2 Posts: 378
    Total Luxurry :)
  • patpat Posts: 10,421
    Actually, it is Touring Luxury, but you can call it total luxury if you'd like. ;)
  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Posts: 4,228
    Wrong, wrong, wrong! Legend has it that it was named after Toulouse-Lautrec, although some Vigor(ously) deny this, calling it (in)Acura(te).
  • patpat Posts: 10,421
    Hahahaha!! Excellent!! :shades:
This discussion has been closed.