Hyundai Sonata 2006-2007

backy · November 2005

Good question. Perhaps there is more to adding this technology to a V6 than you think. Consider that the only V6s to have it right now are the 3.5L i-VTEC engines used in the Accord Hybrid (a $30k car) and the up-level Odyssey (also about $30k). i-VTEC is Honda's most advanced passenger car engine technology. Hyundai started using CVVT technology on their passenger cars only a couple of years ago, first on the Elantra, now on other models like the Sonata. Honda has been doing CVVT for years. Thus Hyundai's engine technology is generally behind that of Honda's. Also, Honda's VCM (trademark) technology involves some trickery in cancelling noise created by turning off a bank of cylinders--they call it Active Noise Cancellation. If it were easy/inexpensive to add VCM to a V6, I would expect that Honda would have added it to all their V6s, and that other companies with advanced engine technology, e.g. Toyota and BMW, would have added it as well. I wonder also if Honda has patented their VCM technology, since we haven't yet seen something similar on other makes.

So while Hyundai has made great strides in engine technology in the past few years, e.g. with the new I4 and V6 in the Sonata being competitive with those from Toyota and Honda in power, perhaps it is too big a leap for Hyundai to offer something like Honda's VCM right now. But in the future... who knows?

johnjj · November 2005

bri,
The botom line is MPG. The Sonata's peppy V6 gives 20 & 30 mpg. What competitor MDS or CDS engine gives better mpg with equal pep without having to spend thousands of dollars more for cost?
John

desertguy · November 2005

This cylinder deactivation is not a new technology.
GM's first use of Displacement on Demand was in 1981 on the Cadillac V8-6-4 engine. GM's engine controller, based on engine load, signalled electro-mechanical actuators to engage or disengage rocker arms to permit or prevent engine valve operation, thereby deactivating cylinders. The system was capable of operation with 4, 6, or 8 cylinders

backy · November 2005

As I recall, that experiment died a quick death.

jeffc · November 2005

I just got a 06 Sonata GLS V-6 and also have heard and felt that faint click in the gas pedal when you first start out.

I also filled up the fuel tank and am now hearing that sloshing, perculating (sp?) sound when I brake and start up again.Don't remember it doing it during the test drive, it started after I filled the tank up.

Love the car though, I had an 01 GLS up until 2 yrs ago and traded on SUV ( now long gone).

Any other issues to watch for? Have the dealers been discussing these 2 noises at all and is there a fix?

bhmr59 · November 2005

That Caddy V-8,6,4 was a total disaster and was quickly yanked from the market. It's a long time ago, but I think GM even replaced some of those engines with conventional engines.

desertguy · November 2005

Hey guys, I'm not touting the 1981 Cadillac on demand engine. My point was that this concept was around 25 years ago. Secondly, who is to say that these newer on demand engines will not be a bust? To me it is just another complication that can go wrong on a car and for what...3 more mpg?

brj · November 2005

> GM's first use of Displacement on Demand
> was in 1981 on the Cadillac V8-6-4 engine.

I didn't know that was ever actually implemented at all--wow. I do remember reading a Popular Mechanics article on GM's (specifically Calliac's) further endeavors on this line later in the 80s--that was the first time I heard of it. Cadillac even tried piggybacking a small engine (like a small 4-cylinder) onto a larger one. The large one would kick on and off as-needed like the hybrids today, and the car would cruise with the 4-cylinder. Obviously that one was never tried.

But I think it's important to be careful not to bash a technology simply because it was released years or even decades ago as a failed version by an American auto company at the low point of its competence. (Not that anyone was bashing the technology itself--it's just easy to to fall into that trap.) Look at what that thinking did to the progress of diesel engines in our country, thanks to Plymouth and closed minds who needed no more information. I personally would rather have a diesel and have the option to burn vegetable oil (and may still do that). Although CDT was implemented irresponsibly in 1981 just like diesel was before that, it showed that the technology was there, and technology has improved.

Well I do think I remember reading a statement from one of the DaimlerChrysler VP's that the MDS added about $50 to the cost of the production of the engine, but I can't find that statement now. So well-heard about the level of technology and cost, but considering the Magnum RT goes for under 30K and is a lot "more car" in terms of mechanics, it seems to be more of a savoir-faire/engineering know-how issue than actual production cost. Regarding BMW and others not all doing it (yet), it isn't every day that brand new engines are designed from the ground up, so I just figured that as long as you're doing that, why not include CDT. It's probably in the future, I realize there are constrainst like deadlines and getting a new car to market. At least Hyundai apparently isn't afraid to add new features admidstream.

And I meant Cylinder Deactivation Technology (CDT) by the way, not Cylinder Deactivation System. (And I spelled cylinder with 2 L's, not one!) It was late.

chuck1 · November 2005

"As I recall, that experiment died a quick death."

This technology is nolonger an experiment. It is now available in the new Malibu. Computers and engine controls have come a LONG WAY since the 70's.

backy · November 2005

That's pretty neat! Does it do a 6-3 thing or 6-4-2? I'm surprised Chevy doesn't mention this feature on the Malibu web site--it's pretty rare in the class. But if Chevy can do it with the Malibu, maybe it won't be long before Hyundai follows.

bhmr59 · November 2005

I checked the Malibu site and saw a 4 cyl and two 6 cyls, but no mention of a 6-3 or 6-4-2. Is Chevy's web site up to date? Or is this something brand new that just hasn't received publicity yet?

zen2 · November 2005

Fix for the sloshing: Put you golf clubs in the trunk,
and turn your radio up. I have never heard it again
after my test drive.

I've never felt the faint click in gas pedal, but I doubt
that it would bother me.

Check your mirrors though. My right one is loose, leaving
a slight gap. I am taking it in tomorrow to get fixed.

picard12 · November 2005

Does sonata have corrosion problem similar to accord? The accord tend to corrode at the rear wheel fenders.

diro · November 2005

I just got a GLS 4cyl. I've put 300 miles on it.I'm getting 24 miles to the gallon highway & city. I'm curious about the 6 cyl,as to what it's averaging per gallon.I waited 6 weeks for this car. It would be a shame if I waited 6 weeks to save a mile or two per gallon. I had a elantra & it gave me 30 miles per gallon City & Highway.So i'm not thrilled by any means about 24 mpg. So I would get some details about true gas millage for the 6.

To answer your ? The 4 has plenty! of power. I live in a hilly town & I do notice that it bogs down a bit, but just a bit. So I think its a non issue.

bhmr59 · November 2005

300 miles is WAY too early to be thinking about your MPG.

You don't know how full the "full tank of gas" the dealer gave you was. Your city & highway mix will also have an affect on your MPG. Plus, your car is nowhere's near broken in.

However, if you expect to get better milage from your new Sonata compared to your old Elantra, you will be disappointed. The Sonata is bigger and heavier and has a larger engine. You'll use more fuel. But you'll have other comforts which you may find worth offsetting to a few MPG. Think of Caddy to Chev Impala. Both good cars, but Caddy has more comforts & Impala will give better MPG (usually).

krika · November 2005

I remember seeing an advertisement in Automobile magazine a month ago. Its a V8 Malibu which shuts down 4 cylinders when cruising. I will dig through my magazine pile and post again when I find it.

haefr · November 2005

People post how smoothly it runs and how powerful it is, but there seems to be a dearth of fuel usage posts on the new 3.3L V6. Since these cars were released for sale in June, I'd think at least some would have enough break-in miles by now to reflect what they're capable of in terms of fuel economy. As Yogi Bera once said, "The silence is deafening."

zen2 · November 2005

I had a Chevy Celebrity which used to shut down
all 6 cylinders when turning a corner.

zen2 · November 2005

Why would you have to know if the tank was full?
The trip computer doesn't keep track of the gallons
used?

I have 1280 miles on my 6 cyl, and have gotten 25.4
mpg, about 80 % highway miles. I expect it will
get better, now that it is broken in.

desertguy · November 2005

Filling the tank and noting the odometer reading and then refilling the tank and noting the new odo reading is the only accurate method of computing mileage IMO. The trip computer is often inaccurate by 10% or more.

targettuning · November 2005

For all those interested..it is the Chevy Impala V-8 that has cylinder deactivation, not the 6 cylinder Malibu

zen2 · November 2005

Thanks for the info. I will do that on my next fillup.
Do you have any idea why that is?

tbear503 · November 2005

The cadillac V8-6-4 was bought from Ford the previous year, who was developing it for the Lincoln Town car. Nothing new for GM to sell something that was not fully developed, such as the crappy diesels they sold during the same era.

I really doubt how much it can really contribute to fuel efficiency since at 60mph one is using only about 14hp. The engine wiil use as much gas as it takes to maintain a given speed no matter how many cylinders are activated. That's my HO.

desertguy · November 2005

Just the nature of electronic calibration I would guess. I'm sure you have heard of speedometers that are off by 3 or 4 MPH or an erratic outside temp guage. What I would(and actually will do after I get a few more miles on the car) is do the fill/refill thing and check my trip computer at the same time. This should give me a good idea of it's accuracy. Could be right on!

acurattle · November 2005

Got my GLS V6 on July 6th. I drive until empty then fill the tank, and I record in a small memo book the number of gallons to fill the tank and the number of miles since the previous fuelling. In doing my calculations for MPG and comparing to the computer, it looked to me like the numbers were pretty close at first. Not so on the next few tanks. Then I found out why: Just resetting the trip distance on the computer does not reset the MPG! That function also has to be reset each time. Otherwise, it's the cumulative MPG that is being given. (BTW, if anybody is using the E/T function, that would also need a separate reset.) Previous trip computers I've used did not work like this; one reset did it all. Since I found out how the Sonata does it, my numbers are within 1 MPG of the computer's. Here are my actuals from my records:

#1 Hwy:15% Trip:291.7 miles Gals:16.077 MPG:18.14
#2 Hwy:0% Trip:256.7 miles Gals:15.761 MPG:16.28
#3 Hwy:30% Trip:198.0 miles Gals:9.174 MPG:21.58
#4 Hwy:95% Trip:436.2 miles Gals:16.277 MPG:26.80
#5 Hwy:95% Trip:482.0 miles Gals:16.447 MPG:29.31
#6 Hwy:95% Trip:390.7 miles Gals:15.621 MPG:24.96
#7 Hwy:95% Trip:298.2 miles Gals:10.898 MPG:27.36
#8 Hwy:95% Trip:460.5 miles Gals:16.053 MPG:28.69
#9 Hwy:70% Trip:390.1 miles Gals:16.214 MPG:24.06
#10 Hwy:65% Trip:373.8 miles Gals:15.090 MPG:24.77

Added a record in my book for the computer reading on #10: 24.6 MPG. Less than 0.2 MPG difference. I'm on my 11th tank of gas now, and have about 3700 miles on the car. Went on two trips, but otherwise have local city driving only. So far, no problems with the car, and it has been a sheer joy to use. Even the much maligned seats feel just fine to me. Sure, I have few little minor annoyances like with the seat belt chime and the lack of a steering wheel audio channel/station control, but those things are no biggies. The responsive power, smootheness, quiet ride, superior handling, safety features, visibility, and style of my 2006 Sonata make this the best car I've ever had. The superior warranty and relatively low cost compared to similar cars I looked at make it even that much better, IMHO. :shades:

desertguy · November 2005

"IMHO" No need to be humble about it! I feel the same way about my V6 LX.

If it is good it is good. We don't need others to agree with us in order to validate our purchase decision do we?

zen2 · November 2005

Thanks for all the info. That's less than 1 percent
difference on the mpg. I'll crosscheck mine after I get a few more miles. I am pretty happy with mine too, but unfortunately I am one of the ones whose body does not agree with the seat. A cushion I got seems to help. OK around town, but long trips, over 100 miles, are really
painful.

jnt · November 2005

Just a correction:

Malibu has V6's only. The GM V8 that has the Cylinder De-activation is the 5.3L V8 used on their Grand Prix GXP and the new Impala SS.

BTW, this feature normally gives about 10% improvement on fuel effiency. Having 6 speed would save abut 6-7 % (vs. 4 Speed). But overall, mass reduction probably helps quite a bot too.

jt

lawrence45 · November 2005

What is your opinion of the sunroof in the Sonata? My dealer hasn't located the car I requested but said he had one with a sunroof. I never had a sunroof before. It may be a nice feature though. Many of you have complained about squeaks, etc. Any feedback would be appreciated.

goodegg · November 2005

Any car I've ever owned with a sunroof squeak was in the sliding shade under the sunroof/moonroof. And none of them ever leaked. Fugetaboutit. Get one. You'll love it.

desertguy · November 2005

I honestly would not buy a car without a sunroof. One caveat though, if you are very tall the roof intrudes a little into head room.

tenpin288 · November 2005

We own an 04 Sonata and an 05 Tucson and both have factory sunroofs. We wouldn't get them any other way. No squeaks or leaks and having the ability to open the roof on a warm summer night and see the stars makes it well worth it! :shades:

johnjj · November 2005

"Sure, I have few little minor annoyances like with the seat belt chime..."
I couldn't agree more. Those chimes drive me nuts. Does anyone know which wire to pull to stop it?
John

krika · November 2005

love my sunroof. no complaints!

krika · November 2005

i am waiting, too....

i am so used to putting on seat belt as soon as i get in the car that i dont' need any chime to remind me. but my habit is to start the car and then put on the seat belt. so the chime is irritating :mad: . hope meddling with the wires doesn't void any warranty :confuse:

haefr · November 2005

So, you attained a high (so far) of 29.31 mpg while the engine still had under 3,000 break-in miles? That's not bad at all - especially for a powerplant capable of generating 235 hp! I expect by the time you've accumulated 5,000-6,000 miles, you'll see 31+ mpg on another long trip at steady highway speed. I'm old enough to remember how people marveled that the mid-sixties VW Beetle flat-four was capable of 30 mpg at 60 mph! (all 36 hp of it...) I recently came across the December, 1954 issue of Popular Mechanics magazine in which Tom McCahill tested the 1955 Ford Fairlane with the "Thunderbird" V8 engine. The car averaged 14 mpg over extended highway driving at a steady 60 mph. But at least it returned a zero-sixty acceleration time of 12+ seconds. (Remember when a gallon of leaded regular cost 15 cents? I do.

)

bamacar · November 2005

Definitely cuts into the headroom (front and rear). I like that Hyundai allows you to buy a fairly optioned vehicle (LX no sunroof) without forcing the option like other manufacturers. I have had them and consider them useless, a weight and noise liability, and a high cost option. I have never understood the fascination with the sunroof. A convertible is a very different story.

averigejoe · November 2005

Did you notice in that 4-car comparo that the Sonata was the least expensive car. In fact, the Accord EX was $8000 more than the Sonata.

$8000.00 !

I wish Motor Trend had compared the LX Sonata to that Accord EX. Heck, for that money, the Accord EX should be in the same boat with the Azera!
The test suggested Hyundai very closely copied/matched the Sonata to the Camry. Seems like they did the same with the Azera and Avalon too.
The Fusion and the Accord are both significantly smaller inside than the Sonata. The Camry is a little smaller for passengers than the Sonata too. I think that should have carried a little more weight in the comparison test.

desertguy · November 2005

" But at least it returned a zero-sixty acceleration time of 12+ seconds"

Er...gee that's not very good. Perhaps you meant a zero to quarter mile time?

'

snakeweasel · November 2005

In 1955 0 to 60 in 12 seconds was considered good. In the late 40's early 50's 20 seconds was considered good. FWIW I am playing around with a 34 lincoln with a V-12 that is doing good if it gets to 60 in under a minute

.

bryan200k · November 2005

I am a little undecided on whether to get a sunroof or not. At 6 ft 1 in, I have a long torso, and most cars that I sit in, my head touches the ceiling. Scratch those cars off my list. My teenage son thinks that I should get the sunroof. Last weekend, we looked at a few Sonatas. I went back-n-forth between two LXs, in which one had a sunroof and the other didn't. The sunroof does subtract about an inch to 1.5 in of headroom, but as the salesman showed me, by lowering the seat to the lowest setting, this wasn't a problem with the sunroof version.

BTW, you mentioned convertable. At the one dealership that we stopped at, they had this beautiful gray Sonata with a 'simulated convertable' top. It wasn't actually a convertable, but it had a 'rag' covering on the roof to make it look like a convertable. It was really SHARP, but a $1400 option.

Still undecided on the sunroof.

desertguy · November 2005

Well we won't know for sure until haefr answers the query. I think a light car like the Fairlane with a big TBird engine has got to be faster than 12 sec. I had a 1956 Triumph TR3 with 100hp that would do 8 seconds.

acurattle · November 2005

Previously discussed this issue. (See message 1990 or try a search on the word chime.) Unfortunately, there's no easy fix involving the wiring that anyone's posted here, AFAIK. Pulling a wire or disconnecting something may not void your warranty, but you could possibly disable the seat belt pretensioner or the yaw and rate sensors for the TCS/ESC, according to the electrical schematic diagrams I saw in the online sevice info. Like you, I start the car first. Have been trying to do buckle up first, but old habits die hard.

goodegg · November 2005

Brother - get the sunroof. Its a nice amenity. Not only does it offer the afforementioned visuals, you can vent the interior without opening the windows, even when its raining (as long as you're moving along). Good at resale too.

Forget about the fake convertible top. Unless you're over 70 years old.

johnjj · November 2005

Like krika and acurattle, I have similar habits where I start the car rolling out of my garage and driveway and then put the seat belt on, and I reverse this procedure when I return home. This causes the chimes to go off and it is very irratating. I can't imagine a pulled wire from the chimer would void any warranty. How would they know it didn't just come loose? And if you found this to affect the car in any other way, you could always reconnect it.
John

haefr · November 2005

"Er...gee that's not very good. Perhaps you meant a zero to quarter mile time?"

Nope. Cars a half century ago were slugs compared to even entry-level cars of today. The "Ford-o-Matic" transmission was nominally a three-speed unit behind a very inefficient torque converter. (a collaborative effort with Borg-Warner based on that company's prior design and used in Studebakers) In normal driving these trannies started in 2nd gear, not 1st which could only be engaged by manually shifting to it. (really intended for dead starts when negotiating steep hills and/or pulling a trailer) There was no torque converter lockup, nor was there an overdrive ratio. The "Thunderbird" V8 (thickwall cast iron for block and heads with the block skirt extending below the crankshaft centerline - Ford's signature "Y-Block V-8" design (very rigid, very durable, but very heavy) of that era required leaded premium and had a thunderous power rating of 170 hp carrying an 8.8:1 compression ratio. Even at that, "Uncle Tom" marveled at the Ford's performance.

snakeweasel · November 2005

Are you sure about that 8 seconds mark? I just reviewed 3 sites about the TR3 that gave the time at 12 seconds.

zen2 · November 2005

I agree. In my opinion, they are a worthless option.
I have had cars with and without. I had two Ford Probes
with them. My current CRV has one. I guess some people
love them, but I don't know why. You are right about
the convertibles though. My first 3 cars were all convertibles, and then I started into the family cars,
until I got divorced. The 68 yellow Pontiac
FIrebird convertible I owned was one of favorites of
all the cars I've owned.

zen2 · November 2005

You should seriously consider that statement about
lowering the seat. I have mine raised to the highest
possible position, and use a 2 inch cushion. This
is the only way I can sit comfotably for more than
30 minutes. If you decide on the sunroof, I
suggest you take a long test drive with the seat in
that position, and then sit in the car a while more.
Otherwise you might be throwing money out that sunroof.

desertguy · November 2005

You appear to be right as the best I could find was 11.9 seconds. In my defense, I also bought a low mileage 1962 TR3B (very rare animal) in 1980. It had more HP and an all synchromest trans. and that is the one I was probably remembering. Only paid $850 for it. It was great fun and I only wish I had it today. It wouldn't have taken much to make it concours. Anyway I won't belabor the point as I seem to be off the mark on cars of the era.

Hyundai Sonata 2006-2007

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles