Howdy, Stranger!

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

Mainstream Large Sedans Comparison



  • allmet33allmet33 Posts: 3,557
    Xtec...first of all, calm down. Not every single posting is going to be on topic, but it won't stray too far (for the most part). Even though the cars themselves weren't mentioned, engines used in some of them are...and they are a part of the car, right? So...

    Louiswei...I'm sorry, but the 3.8 lambda engine that Hyundai uses is not direct utilizes CVVT technology.
  • louisweilouiswei Posts: 3,717
    First of all, the focus of the previous post was not on the cars but the engines, I only supplied the information about the cars to indicate when do those engines first appear on the market. The Hyundai Genesis will belong to this class so it is not unfair to compare its 3.8 V6 to other comparable high output V6 counterparts.

    As for the direct inject, go to google and search the words "hyundai genesis direct inject".
  • Check out this post from over in the Genesis thread...

    Genesis unveiled in Korea

    According to the info culled from Korean news reports the 3.8 will have 290 HP in the new Genesis. :D

    That seems pretty competitive to me. ;)
  • allmet33allmet33 Posts: 3,557
    yeah...I posted a link earlier that mentions a version of the 3.8 being capable of 300+ hp. The top of the line Genesis will have the V-8 that will push out 375 hp.

    Like I said earlier, the 3.8 seems to be a great foundation for Hyundai to build on.
  • xtecxtec Posts: 354
    First of all I wasn't getting upset,I would just like to see fact not fiction if your going to post something like that.Car and driver is showing the Genesis coupe with the 3.8 with 300HP and also say Port fuel injection.I'm glad you made the correction.
  • captain2captain2 Posts: 3,971
    ...I posted a link earlier that mentions a version of the 3.8 being capable of 300+ hp
    And this would be the point of my original post ( and Alexstore's comment) - at 3.8 liters it should be putting out something well in excess of 300hp if that particular engine is to be considered in any way the equal to those 'state -of-the art' engines (and corresponding specs.) as ably summarized by louiswei. Have not seen anything that puts direct njection in any version of the Hyundai 3.8 or FTM claims anything other than some more rudimentary variable valve timing on the intake side only (not continuous, but a simple high rpm camshaft position shift that effectively repositions the camshaft lobes in such a way to hold the intake valves open longer) . This type of thing is similar to what Ford has been doing as well in its DTs for years now and is an order of magnitude less sophisticated than what Toyota and Nissan are now doing. Driving both the Azera and the Sonata, however, I found both engines smooth, willing and with a level of refinement that I had never seen (heard and felt) before in a Korean engine. Not quite the Toyota , Nissan, or Honda engines but close enough that most folks couldn't tell the difference...
  • allmet33allmet33 Posts: 3,557
    and as I is forcasted to put out more than 300 hp. Just because it doesn't do so initially...don't call the engine inadequate. To be quite honest, the 3.8 probably has more growth potential than the Toyota 3.5. Like I said before, a great platform to build on.
  • allmet33allmet33 Posts: 3,557
    Well...for someone that wants to see fact doesn't always practice what he preaches. Anyway...the Genesis Coupe and Sedan are going to be two different animals. From the readings I've come across...the Coupe will only have a turbo charged 4-cyl. engine pushing 220 hp and the 3.8 V-6 with somewhere just north of 300 hp. The Sedan on the other purported to have 3 engine offerings. I have heard rumblings that the V-8 won't make it to the U.S., but if Hyundai is truly shooting for the Infiniti M, E-Class Benz, 5-Series BMW's, they would have to bring the V-8 by default, which has been slated to push 375 hp. The 3.8 V-6 would be offered and it will be pushing close to 350 hp. The entry level Genesis Sedan would get the 3.3 V-6 and it would probably be pushing about 290 hp. The last one is a projection...I think the first two are pretty reasonable expectations.

    I may not always agree with someone, but wrong is wrong and if I'm ever wrong...I have no problem admitting it.
  • bhmr59bhmr59 Posts: 1,598
    This is from the Hyundai site on the Azera: "Continuously Variable Valve Timing modulates the engine´s intake-valve timing relative to the exhaust valves. The result is improved power and fuel efficiency at all engine speeds, as well as smooth idle."

    I'm asking, not being a smarta**; how, in not too techincal terms please, does Hyundais CVVT "rudimentary" compared to the competition? If intake timing is relative to exhaust, wouldn't this be "interactive"?
  • captain2captain2 Posts: 3,971
    when or where did I ever call it 'inadequate'? Not quite up to those standards set by the Toyota or Nissan engines, certainly - one look at the relative specs. will tell you that, both those engines produce more power per unit displacement and provide better FE as well. But the 3.8 is also not inadequate by any stretch. The DT 3.0 in the old 500 , the pushrod 3.xs in some GM cars, or even the old 3.5 in the XG - those would be inadequate IMO and as I think you noted I am talking engines only here, not necessarily the cars built around them.
    As I know you're one those 'Hyundai guys', relax, the Azera remains a damn fine effort on Hyundai's part, something I think those Detroit Cos. only wish they could do, and may end up the best 'value' of all the cars in this group especially if it can live down the italicized 'H' on its trunk - something it has been doing well at - so far.
  • allmet33allmet33 Posts: 3,557
    I didn't say YOU said it was inadequte, that was a statement made by someone else (refer to post #3875). I certainly can't debate the facts you're stating about the power Toyota & Honda are getting from their engines along with the FE they enjoy. no means would I argue the fact that being one area that Hyundai needs to shore up (once you get past the Accent, Elantra & Sonata). However...if you look at the FE of the Hyundai vehicles, it's really not terrible either. I mean...up until the new model year, Hyundai & Nissan vehicles were getting close to the same FE.

    I am a Hyundai guy only because of the past to I've owned and not having any problems with them. They've definitelyproven themselves in my eyes. Are they the best thing out, not at all. I'm am realistic enough to recognize that fact. However, I will say that the Hyundai products have been perfect for me and my needs and wants at the time. Ultimately, I wouldn't mind an Infiniti M, maybe the Lexus LS460, or a Benz E-Class (if they can get their stuff together). In the meantime...I'm more than content with my Azera.
  • I have a V6 Lucerne and find it a delightful car for narmal driving. The fuel economy is outstanding, often 28-29 on the highway and 24ish for mixed, the car has a lot of nice features and comfort gadgets and rides well. The handling is so-so and I do wish the rear seat would allow folding for trunk access. I paid in the low 20's for a low miles program vehicle, which seems like a fair price, I would not pay 30K for a new one of these though.

    I'm really happy with the power of the V6, I don't want to mess with a more complicated aluminium V8 with overhead cams for the kind of driving I do, I'm just a real normal kind of driver. It's funny to read the posts above, it's like people would buy one of these cars based on which one won a drag race, who cares when you are poking down the interstate on hour three of some boring drive, or loading groceries and kids in the car every week, that's what most of us do with cars.
  • captain2captain2 Posts: 3,971
    bhmr- have never seen anything from Hyundai (or anybody else) that confirms CVVT, or CVVTi - if it does do this I would regard it as an important technological step on Hyundai's part and I stand corrected. A link would be appreciated.

    Have no idea how old you are, but back in the 60s and earlier 70s (in the good ole days before engine computers and emissions controls) we used to switch camshafts in those big American V8s, a 'grind' cam that would effectively hold intake valves open and therefore improve engine breathing and power especially at higher rpm. The tradeoff, at the time, was an engine that couldn't and wouldn't idle well, and suspect FE. These new high tech engines change all that by allowing the camshaft to continuously change position relative to the intake (and exhaust) valves having the effect of not only improving both high and low speed operation but also improving FE, emissions, and flattening/widening a given engine's torque curve - thereby addressing one of the more common problems with these OHC engines (peaky performance). My understanding of the 3.8 Lambda (like several others engines that purport to have 'VVT') is that this function is simply an inertial mechanical shift of the camshaft and only happens at a given higher rpm, something kind of pioneered by Honda in their 4 bangers years ago - all of which - is a lot simplier to do than adjusting things as dictated by computer, in response to things to engine temperature, speed, emissions and demands by the driver.
    Adding the additional capabilities to continuously modify exhaust valve timings as well only serves to make things that much more complicated and difficult to do.
  • allmet33allmet33 Posts: 3,557're right about how most of us would use our cars on a daily basis. Where it may not be about winning a drag race, it is important for a car to be able to move into and out of traffic confidently. Not just when there's only one person in the car, but also when both the passenger cabin AND trunk are full.
  • allmet33allmet33 Posts: 3,557's a link, just scroll down till you see the paragraph about the 3.8L engine...

    Hyundai Motor Corp
  • captain2captain2 Posts: 3,971
    OK, I'll stand corrected, there is apparently more to the 3.8 then I thought.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731're right about how most of us would use our cars on a daily basis. Where it may not be about winning a drag race, it is important for a car to be able to move into and out of traffic confidently. Not just when there's only one person in the car, but also when both the passenger cabin AND trunk are full.

    Absolutely. It is pretty sad that Buick has built themselves into a corner and can't give us a better V6. The V8 Lucerne isn't as fast as a V6 Avalon or Maxima, IIRC. The V6 Lucerne is a good deal slower than my 4-cyl Accord. It is adequate for day-to-day driving, but it wouldn't be the ideal car for passing a truck on a two-lane.

    I imagine in a couple of years, GM will have the 3.6L going into nearly all of its vehicles midsize and higher. Right now, the Lucerne and Impala V6s are put to shame by vehicles like the Azera, Taurus, Avalon, and Maxima.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    Has anybody driven this car with the new 3.8 in it? How is it compared to the Azera?
  • captain2captain2 Posts: 3,971
    in all fairness to GM, grad, I think it should be noted that in all probability, that this is not like GM (or Buick in this case) doesn't know that the Lucerne should have the 3.6 liter V6 - more like they can't up production capacity (money?) or close old engine plants (labor contracts and money) to do it. Ford and Chrysler have been suffering from the same sort of problems.
    That said, what earthly reason would anybody have to pay the extra money (and gas) for the Northstar V8, if that 3.6 could easily match/better those power/FE ratings of not only the V8 but also the other (V6) engines in this group? For those of us that have come to appreciate the power and FE available in some of the cars in this class, the 3.8 in the Lucerne makes it an unworthy competitor, just like the Five Hundred was - with the same 200hp.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    I agree completely. Unfortunately, even its platform-mate the Impala has more power available than the 3800, with the 3.5 and 3.9L. Not a ton better, but with a nearly two-ton vehicle, I'll take the option of extra power AND fuel economy these two engines deliver over the 3800.

    3.5L in Impala - 211hp, 18/29 MPG
    3.9L in Impala - 233hp, 18/28 MPG

    3.8L in Lucerne - 197hp, 16/25 MPG

    For the record, the Impala is about 200 lbs lighter than the Lucerne.

    Give me an LTZ Impala over a Lucerne CX or CXL V6 anyday, if I MUST have GM.
Sign In or Register to comment.