/

Howdy, Stranger!

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

Sign In Register




Midsize Sedans 2.0

1…473474476478479…872

Comments

  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,907
    Yep, Suzuki is so proud of its new Kizashi it didn't even have an exhibit at one of the largest auto shows in the nation (Twin Cities). Good way to get the word out on a new design. :P
    · Share on Facebook Share on Google+
  • kdshapirokdshapiro Posts: 5,751
    edited March 2010
    Well that's not my take on my Lexus vs my Subaru, but to each their own. I will say it bothers me less when the Subaru gets dinged than the Lexus...so for that I love the Subaru more. :shades
    · Share on Facebook Share on Google+
  • acdiiacdii Posts: 753
    Come to think of it, they didn't have one that I saw at the CAS either. Chevy didn't have the Volt either, which is why I thought it wasn't coming any time soon. What I did see at the CAS was a lot of broken and missing parts on a lot of the cars. People sure are careless.
    · Share on Facebook Share on Google+
  • m6userm6user Posts: 3,174
    NOW we know why Hyundai isn't offering a V6 in the 2011 Sonata.

    I think we knew the reason before(CAFE) but now we know just how well they have addressed it and how good of a decision it was. The HP addicts were crying in their beer. Now they can wipe away those tears.

    Hyundai seems to have the knack for quickly addressing the marketplace, decisive and adaptable. Not traits historically attributable to auto manufacturers. Hope they keep improving in quality or at least don't take their eye off the ball and let quality fall. They really are quite interesting to watch.
    · Share on Facebook Share on Google+
  • m6userm6user Posts: 3,174
    edited March 2010
    Kind of funny they come out with a new "Sport" derivitive that is cosmetic only. What, are people already tired of the styles? Maybe they will sell one now. I kind of like it but they need to do something to generate sales and I don't think this is it.
    · Share on Facebook Share on Google+
  • dash5dash5 Posts: 421
    So, disadvantages in owning a turbo vehicle? Sonata is on my short list along with the Fusion and Altima, and the turbo is intriguing. 275+ horses would be quite nice, but what is the trade off? Louder? More likely to need repairs? Anything?
    · Share on Facebook Share on Google+
  • m6userm6user Posts: 3,174
    Are you talking about the Chicago Auto Show? If so, you must have missed them.. Volt was there too.

    2010 SUZUKI KIZASHI: On exhibit for the first time at a Chicago Auto Show is Suzuki’s new flagship vehicle, the 2010 Kizashi (pronounced "Kee-Zah-Shee").

    People aren't just careless, some are downright destructive.
    · Share on Facebook Share on Google+
  • mz6greyghostmz6greyghost Posts: 1,230
    edited March 2010
    275+ horses would be quite nice, but what is the trade off? Louder? More likely to need repairs? Anything?

    Turbos aren't necessarily louder than their naturally aspirated counterparts, although some of the noises will be different (turbo spooling up, blow-off valve, etc.). Reliability is a BIG concern for me at this point, since IIRC Hyundai is relatively new to the turbocharging game, and although I'm sure that Hyundai has done everything possible to make it reliable over the long run, only time and experience can tell whether or not they actually will be.

    Gas mileage will also be only solved by time and experience, since in my exposure to turbocharging, in order to really get the advertised power, your foot needs to be in the throttle, and you need to keep the revs up, lowering fuel economy in the process. I'd love to see some real-world mileage figures before signing up for one. And although I don't doubt the 34 MPG that Hyundai advertises, I'm sure the turbos aren't contributing much (if anything) to achieve it.
    · Share on Facebook Share on Google+
  • m6userm6user Posts: 3,174
    edited March 2010
    I share your concern on reliablility but the 10yr/100k powertrain warranty is calming to a degree. I'm pretty tired of a car by that time anyway.

    Don't know exactly the methodology that the EPA uses to derive the city/hwy numbers but I assume there's some hard acceleration involved to mimic "real world". From what I've seen since 2008, the EPA numbers are pretty accurate for the normally aspirated engines. Maybe some of the other forums like Saab, VW and Suburu have some insight on turbo real world mpg vs. EPA.
    · Share on Facebook Share on Google+
  • bobadbobad Posts: 1,587
    edited March 2010
    Hyundai is relatively new to the turbocharging game, and although I'm sure that Hyundai has done everything possible to make it reliable over the long run, only time and experience can tell whether or not they actually will be.

    I'm sure the turbocharger itself is made by the one of the 3 or 4 turbo manufacturers worldwide. AFAIK, nobody makes their own turbos, but if anyone has the expertise to do so, Hyundai does.

    Turbocharged engines may benefit from synthetic oil, IMHO 1 of the only legitimate uses for synthetic.

    Extra heat is produced in the exhaust area, so extra shielding and cooling schemes may be used.

    I know all this because I have used turbo diesel equipment.
    · Share on Facebook Share on Google+
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Posts: 3,855
    Take a look at the "detailed comparison" tab at: http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/fe_test_schedules.shtml

    I would seem to me that other than the 8.46 mph/s max acceleration in the high speed test, the EPA test schedule would not appear to cause the turbo to kick in? So as someone else implied, you may only get the mileage advertised and maybe better, if you drive in a way that does not actually require much turbo assist.

    I wonder what they do when a car can not accelerate at 8.46 mph per sec, which would imply 0-60 time of 7.1 sec? I suppose they just floor it.

    For myself the 175 or so HP from the current crop of I4s would be sufficient, I'd not pay extra for the (to me) excessive HP of a either a V6 or turbo.
    · Share on Facebook Share on Google+
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    edited March 2010
    Downsides to a turbo...

    Insurance rates. Compare a natrually aspirated V6 and a turbo-4 and I think you'll find the rates for the turbo to be higher, simply because of the sporty connotations "turbo" has.
    · Share on Facebook Share on Google+
  • syitalian25syitalian25 Posts: 303
    edited March 2010
    If you were looking for more power you should have waited for the 2011 Sonata 2.0T ... 274 HP, 269 ft. lb. torque @ 1800-4500 rpms, 34 mpg highway, all on regular 87 octane. Wow!! I am excited to make this my next new vehicle so I can smoke those yuppies in their Volkswagen GTIs and such haha.

    Turbo

    http://hyundainews.com/Auto_Show_News/New_York_Auto_Show/2011_Sonata_2.0T/Press_- - Release.asp

    Hybrid

    http://hyundainews.com/Auto_Show_News/New_York_Auto_Show/2011_Sonata_Hybrid/Pres- - s_Release.asp
    · Share on Facebook Share on Google+
  • m6userm6user Posts: 3,174
    edited March 2010
    I knew you could shed some light on the EPA methods. Thanks. I would think to achieve that 0-60 in 7.1 they would still have to engage the turbo so maybe the ratings would be close. Plus if you drive a normal engine like you would to engage the turbo it would definitely affect mpg as well but probably not quite as much. Little too "engineery" for me to comprehend.

    I would possibly opt for the turbo if the cost was maybe $1500 more, but I think it's going to be more like $3k more and that's too much for me.

    I was watching the webcast but my DSL connection must be crap as it was really cutting out and I can only hear about 40% of what is said. Prices weren't stated but the CEO did mention that you could get into the turbo for "around 25k".
    · Share on Facebook Share on Google+
  • syitalian25syitalian25 Posts: 303
    He said a "well equipped" turbo would be under $25K, who knows what that means but the director of sales just said it will have more road noise similar to the SE. As far as the 0-60, the turbo is going to do WELL better than a measily 7.1 seconds. I do 7.2 in my non-turbo.. I will guess closer to 6 seconds, maybe even high 5's.
    · Share on Facebook Share on Google+
  • m6userm6user Posts: 3,174
    edited March 2010
    I wasn't questioning whether or not the turbo would do 7.1 or a lot better. I was just commenting regarding the EPA test that they would still have to engage the turbo to reach those numbers.

    The press release(your links don't work....for me at least) says the turbo will be availalbe in the SE and LTD w/ the the Limited getting these items in addition to the turbo:
    Panoramic sunroof
    18-inch hyper silver alloy wheels
    Dual exhaust system
    Steering wheel-mounted paddle shifters

    My assumption is that he was talking about the SE for under 25k. I thought he said "about 25k" but you may well be right. Anyway, the current SE w/destination chg. is about $23300. That would mean the turbo would only add maybe $1600-1700 to the price of an SE. Pretty darn competitive if it turns out that way.
    · Share on Facebook Share on Google+
  • shabadoo25shabadoo25 Posts: 232
    I couldn't find a Suzuki dealership with a map and a compass...not that I have any desire to...
    · Share on Facebook Share on Google+
  • m6userm6user Posts: 3,174
    edited March 2010
    Mazda6 diesel confirmed with hybrid-like 43 MPG

    That's a headline from an article on autoblog. That would be sweet. It's supposed to be attached to new 6 speed auto that is similar to a DSG.

    The Sky-D will be introduced in the U.S., and the company says it will be used in its “next generation midsized diesel car” and will get up to 43 mpg. We’re not sure what car that would be, as the Mazda3 and Mazda6 have been recently redesigned.

    Above was from cars.com. The Mazda6 was redesigned for 2009 so it's possible they could do a major touch up and call it a redesign especially with an all new drivetrain.
    · Share on Facebook Share on Google+
  • dash5dash5 Posts: 421
    Did they mention if it was basically an SE with a turbo or would it be in a limited package? Interested to see how they work that. Ideal for me would be a limited, with the turbo and the dual exhaust.

    Hmmmmmmmm.
    · Share on Facebook Share on Google+
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Posts: 3,855
    edited March 2010
    Yes, I also assumed that the acceleration rate that was equivalent to 7.1s 0-60, would cause the turbo to kick in. However, EPA only accelerates that fast in the "high speed test" and even for that test it just says that the max acceleration rate is 8.46 mph per sec, so we do not really know how often or for how long they go at that rate.

    In the "AC" test cycle, the max acceleration is 5.1 mph per sec, that being equivalent to almost 12 sec for 0-60, means probably no turbo effect there. In the other 3 test cycles, they use a max acceleration rate of 3.2 or 3.3 mph per sec, that'd be about 18-19 sec to get to 60 and there would definitely be no turbo needed to achieve that.
    · Share on Facebook Share on Google+
  • m6userm6user Posts: 3,174
    The press release(your links don't work....for me at least) says the turbo will be availalbe in the SE and LTD w/ the the Limited getting these items in addition to the turbo:
    Panoramic sunroof
    18-inch hyper silver alloy wheels
    Dual exhaust system
    Steering wheel-mounted paddle shifters

    I posted the above about 3 posts back.
    · Share on Facebook Share on Google+
  • m6userm6user Posts: 3,174
    Looks a little murky then. I looked up some subu, saab, and vw turbos on fueleconomy.gov but none that I checked had user reported numbers. Probably have to the check the forums and see if can get an idea. For the way I would normally drive the EPA numbers would probably be pretty close anyways.
    · Share on Facebook Share on Google+
  • dash5dash5 Posts: 421
    Whoops I missed that somehow thank you. Very tempting indeed.
    · Share on Facebook Share on Google+
  • 193912940193912940 Posts: 9
    Nissan Altima or hyundai Azera both fully loaded. Which one should I pick. I want a quiet comfortable ride with all the goodies.
    · Share on Facebook Share on Google+
  • stephen987stephen987 Posts: 1,994
    If you want quiet and soft, the Azera's a better bet than the Altima. The Sonata's also worth a look, for a bit less money.
    · Share on Facebook Share on Google+
  • wolverinejoe80wolverinejoe80 Posts: 337
    what year on Azera? refreshed one right? those looks very nice. mpg got better and it's very very quiet and soft ride. very underrated.
    · Share on Facebook Share on Google+
  • syitalian25syitalian25 Posts: 303
    Get a slightly used 2008/2009 Azera. You can pick one up with 35K miles for about 15-16K if you look around, it is an excellent bargain considering everything that comes in that car.
    · Share on Facebook Share on Google+
  • carstrykecarstryke Posts: 168
    altima......those cheap korean cars aren't even in the same league as the altima.....just remember "you get what you pay for"
    · Share on Facebook Share on Google+
  • carstrykecarstryke Posts: 168
    edited April 2010
    and you Sonata lovers need to get in and out of your backseat multiple times......if that doesn't knock some sense into you, i don't know what will.

    There is a reason i don't wipe my butt with no name toilet paper...and its the same reason i don't buy Korean engineered automobiles.
    · Share on Facebook Share on Google+
  • shabadoo25shabadoo25 Posts: 232
    I've had passengers in my backseat. They have no problems whatsoever.

    As for your insults on Korean cars, check your calendar...it's not 2003 anymore.
    · Share on Facebook Share on Google+
Sign In or Register to comment.