Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see May lease deals!
Options
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
Another thing that folks don't realize...designers jump ship from one company to the next if the next company is willing to pay more. So it's very easy to see how one company's designs closely resemble another company's designs
This is one of the very few advantages from being old enough to have experienced all of this from the late '40s!
Also, the early Datsun 2.0L SOHC Inline 4 was a nice copy of one of the earlier M-B engine designs. The Japanese really didn't become somewhat evolutionary and original until they had been in the U.S. market for a couple of decades.
to have experienced all of this from the late '40s! "
Yes indeed!
I recall how the Chysler-Nissan diesel of the sixties was a direct copy
of the "Screaming-Jimmy," better know as the Detroit Diesel.
Instead of the GM 71 series, the Nissan people made theirs a 75 series, an improvement.
Here's the good part, their brochure was an exact copy as the GM brochure.
Nissan had a whole line of diesels which were marketed here in the U S under the Chysler-
Nissan name as Chysler was looking ahead and locked up that market back then.
One popular series was their 33 series four-stroke, especially their straight six.
Far better built then any MBZ engines available here then, and much less expensive also.
Why do I need to comment on the Genesis logo? I don't care how the logo looks, I care about how the car will perform and how durable it will be. You're a funny guy...truly. You are always looking for the slightest thing you can just to jump on it and make derogatory comments.
Do you really think that the 3.8 isn't capable of greater output than the 263 ponies it's currently kicking out? Not only are you funny, you're....er, uh...nevermind, I won't even go there. Anyway, Hyundai will do what Hyundai will do and there's nothing you can do to stop it. As a matter of fact, the only thing you can do is watch your rearview mirror as an Azera or Genesis pulls up on you and passes you by.
Please read the paragraph that's entitled 'What's Under The Hood'
Genesis Coupe Concept Preview
What...does it say, "... powered by a 3.8-liter V-6 engine pushing north of 300 horsepower."???
"Hyundai engineers still failed with increased displacement to produce adequate power."
HAAAAAA-HAAAAAA-HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA...since when has anyone on any level stated that the 3.8 doesn't produce adequte power??? It currently propels the Azera from 0-60 somewhere between 6-7 seconds. Last time I checked, that's about the same time it takes for the Avalon, Maxima, Altima and most other vehicles in it's class. Have you considered a comedy act with your material? LMAO while ROTF Whew....you slay me.
What say you about the 375 ponies that will grace the engine bay of the upcoming Genesis sedan AND coupe???
Here...take a look and enjoy!
Hyundai Genesis Coupe Concept
*wiping my eyes* Thank you for the good laugh first thing this morning!!!!
A link follows for all us power freaks - a listing of road test results that puts our current Maximas/Avalons/Azeras squarely in the middle of the pack (in terms of performance) with those 10 mpg 'musclecars' of the later 60s/early 70s
http://www.cobranet.com/roadtest.htm.
If you think about it, we really have made some progress, as we don't have to put up with those underpowered tanks built in the 80s anymore . What do we have to complain about - except for possibly the tenfold price increase we've had in automobiles in the last 40 years?
Seriously though...I think Hyundai definitely has the technology to push the hp envelop on it's 3.8 with greater things to come from the future. I think the 3.8 is a great platform for them as it offers flexibility for various vehicles.
Yes cars have gone up in price, but so have salaries and benefits. While gas was 23 cents in the early 50's, that would equate to $5.00 per gallon in todays dollars. Also, look at what you get on a car now compared to then.
Linclons and Cadillacs sold for $3-5,000 in the early 50's and heaters were an option! AC was a $4,000 option.
Here's the break down of the current high output V6s:
Honda J37A1:
Displacement - 3664 cc
HP - 300
Torque - 275 ft·lbf
Technology - SOHC VTEC
First appearance: 2007 MDX
Nissan VQ35HR:
Displacement - 3498 cc
HP - 306
Torque - 268 ft·lbf
Technology - Direct inject, CVTC with hydraulic actuation on the intake cam and electromagnetic on the exhaust cam
First appearance: 2007 G35
Nissan VQ37VHR:
Displacement - 3696 cc
HP - 330
Torque - 270 ft·lbf
Technology - Direct inject, CVTC with hydraulic actuation on the intake cam and electromagnetic on the exhaust cam, VVEL (Variable Valve Event and Lift)
First appearance: 2008 G37 Coupe
Toyota 2GR-FSE:
Displacement - 3456 cc
HP - 306
Torque - 277 ft·lbf
Technology - Duel direct inject (combines gasoline direct injection with traditional port injection), dual-VVT-i (variable valve timing on both the intake and exhaust cams)
First appearance: 2006 IS350
GM LLT:
Displacement - 3564 cc
HP - 304
Torque - 273 ft·lbf
Technology - Direct inject, VVT
First apperance: 2008 CTS
How will the Hyundai 3.8 fit into this group is yet to be seen.
Louiswei...I'm sorry, but the 3.8 lambda engine that Hyundai uses is not direct injection...it utilizes CVVT technology.
As for the direct inject, go to google and search the words "hyundai genesis direct inject".
Genesis unveiled in Korea
According to the info culled from Korean news reports the 3.8 will have 290 HP in the new Genesis.
That seems pretty competitive to me.
Like I said earlier, the 3.8 seems to be a great foundation for Hyundai to build on.
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...
I may not always agree with someone, but wrong is wrong and if I'm ever wrong...I have no problem admitting it.
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"?
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.
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 there...no, 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'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.
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.
Hyundai Motor Corp
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.
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.
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.
We can only hope so - more good choices - because this is perhaps Hyundai's biggest problem - not that its current crop of cars are any good but that nobody believes it!
I think folks just need to be more realistic in realizing the playing field is more level than they want to believe or care to admit to themselves. It's bad enough Americans had to swallow the fact that the Japanese were making better cars than we were, now...they have to turn around and digest the possibility that the Koreans are capable of bringing something to market that can compete with the Japanese offerings AND be better than the American products too.
you would certainly be braver than the average autobuyer, those suspect Hyundai models you mentioned were sold as late as the middle 90s. Besides which, 4 years and 105k, is really something that should be expected these days even from the American brands - make it 8 years and 210k and you really are saying something. Unfortunately, I guess, Hyundai is still a number of years short of having
that kind of history. Keep in mind that the new Sonata opened to JDP 'value' ravings as well as doing pretty well in consumer mag. ratings - it has since slipped.
I have to admit, this model year of Sonata started out like the Azera did. Nobody seemed to be interested in it, however...about 6-8 months after hitting the show rooms, folks DID start taking notice and it took off after that. I remember when I first bought mine...I didn't see any on the roads for a long time, then...one would pop up here and there. Next thing I knew...they were all over the place like the Camry and Accord. They did improve it with the '06 model and yes, it has slipped, but it still remains a very capable and viable option to Accord and Camry (which seems to be having it's own issues as well).
Yes, I'll agree with the fact that the Hyundai turn around is still young and they have a long way to go, but...I think they are raising eyebrows and making other makes a bit nervous along the way. That is a good sign IMO. The key at this point is to be consistent with their newfound growth and appeal and establish continuity in the market so that folks will look at them with more favor than they do now.
You're right, 4 yrs/105K miles is expected by Japanese or American offerings. My mentioning of those statistics is based on the fact that it's a Korean product...a Hyundai. Most folks would scoff at the idea that a Hyundai could be that reliable.
that we disagree on - for 20 (or 30) large, I think the current carbuyers EXPECTS more than that - I know I do - regardless of brand.
Currently...it IS highly expected, considering everyone offering some variation of a 100K mile powertrain warranty (with the exception of Mopar's unlimited powertrain warranty). However, again...with most folks minds still stuck in the past (when it comes to Hyundai)...I really think they are heavily skeptical in terms that they feel Hyundai products aren't reliable enough to to meet those terms.
Currently, I have just over 42K on my '06 Azera and it has been GREAT!!!
Hyundai: Brought to you by Chinet
:P
GM invented VVT. BMW started to use it more than 20 years ago. HONDA just renamed it as VTEC about 10 years ago.
well, not everybody - only those mfgrs that NEED to - consider this -if it wasn't for those fine mid 90s disasters known as Excels etc., we probably do not have anybody (even GM and Chrysler) offering it today.
I don't think that's entirely true...
Fiat was the first auto manufacturer to patent a functional variable valve timing system which included variable lift. Developed by Giovanni Torazza in the late 1960s, the system used hydraulic pressure to vary the fulcrum of the cam followers (US Patent 3,641,988). The hydraulic pressure changed according to engine speed and intake pressure. The typical opening variation was 37%.
In September 1975, General Motors patented a system intended to vary valve lift. GM was interested in throttling the intake valves in order to reduce emissions. This was done by minimizing the amount of lift at low load to keep the intake velocity higher, thereby atomizing the intake charge. GM encountered problems running at very low lift, and abandoned the project.
Alfa Romeo was the first manufacturer to use a variable valve timing system in production cars (US Patent 4,231,330). The 1980 Alfa Romeo Spider 2.0 L had a mechanical VVT system in SPICA fuel injected cars sold in the USA. Later this was also used in the 1983 Alfetta 2.0 Quadrifoglio Oro models as well as other cars.
...
In 1986, Nissan developed their own form of VVT with the VG30DE(TT) engine for their Mid-4 Concept. Nissan chose to focus their NVCS (Nissan Valve-Timing Control System) mainly at low and medium speed torque production because the vast majority of the time, engine RPMs will not be at extremely high speeds. The NVCS system can produce both a smooth idle, and high amounts of low and medium speed torque. Although it can help a little at the top-end also, the main focus of the system is low and medium range torque production. The VG30DE engine was first used in the 300ZX (Z31) 300ZR model in 1987, this was the first production car to use electronically controlled VVT technology.
The next step was taken in 1989 by Honda with the VTEC system. Honda had started production of a system that gives an engine the ability to operate on two completely different cam profiles, eliminating a major compromise in engine design. One profile designed to operate the valves at low engine speeds provides good road manners, low fuel consumption and low emissions output. The second is a high lift, long duration profile and comes into operation at high engine speeds to provide an increase in power output. The VTEC system was also further developed to provide other functions in engines designed primarily for low fuel consumption. The first VTEC engine Honda produced was the B16A which was installed in the Integra, CRX, and Civic hatchback available in Japan and Europe. In 1991 the Acura/Honda NSX powered by the C30A became the first VTEC equipped vehicle available in the US. VTEC can be considered the first "cam switching" system and is also one of only a few currently in production.
...
In 1992 BMW introduced the VANOS system. Like the Nissan NVCS system it could provide timing variation for the intake cam in steps (or phases), the VANOS system differed in that it could provide one additional step for a total of three. Then in 1998 the Double Vanos system was introduced which significantly enhances emission management, increases output and torque, and offers better idling quality and fuel economy. Double Vanos was the first system which could provide electronically controlled, continuous timing variation for both the intake and exhaust valves. In 2001 BMW introduced the Valvetronic system. The Valvetronic system is unique in that it can continuously vary intake valve lift, in addition to timing for both the intake and exhaust valves. The precise control the system has over the intake valves allows for the intake charge to be controlled entirely by the intake valves, eliminating the need for a throttle valve and greatly reducing pumping loss. The reduction of pumping loss accounts for more than a 10% increase in power output and fuel economy.
Source: Variable valve timing
It's not really about not needing them. In all honesty...it shows a company is willing to put their money where their mouth is. Right now, the best one walking the walk is BMW with the 4 year maintenance free program. Regardless of why they're doing it...they're doing it and they can't be losing that much money over it either. Same thing with the 100K mile warranties...if a car is really bad, why would they offer it knowing full well they would lose the shirts off their backs trying to cover all the warrantied repairs.
You mention the Excel as being the reason that Hyundai made that move, but what folks fail to realize is...Volkswagen was doing it before Hyundai even made the move. Mitsubishi followed them...Hyundai didn't start offering it until '02 or shortly before that.
The 3800 engine is the old Buick produced engine based on a V8 and thus has an offset crank for even firing due to its 90 degree Vee angle.
The V6s in the Impala are 60 degree designs based upon the old 2.8 liter introduced in the X-car ( Citation, Phoenix, et al ) in the early 80s.
I do agree with your earlier assumption that production capacity is one of the reasons these pushrod engines continue to exist. An additional factor is the fact that the car platforms they're in are not modern, either - hence the production facilities are designed to assemble the vehicles with the old engines.
Back on the E85: what a farce that is. Even if it was readily available, why would anyone use it if it costs the same as gasoline. Tests have shown that fuel economy is about 20% less.
There is one place , where it does make sense and thats in Brazil
Actually, they do if you purchase a CPO (certified pre-owned) Hyundai.
Hyundai CPO Warranty