By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
Ford owned its own steel manufacturing, in one factory. Hyundai's steel manufacturing will apply to all of its auto factories. That is one difference.
Other differences: How many other auto manufacturers make their cars using their own robots? How many make their own ships for transporting their cars around the world?
A few other industry-leading firsts:
* First auto manufacturer to offer standard side airbags on every vehicle (late 2000+).
* First auto manufacturer to offer life-saving ESC standard on a mid-sized family sedan (Sonata, early 2005).
* First auto manufacturer to offer DI engine standard on a mid-sized family sedan (Sonata, early 2010)
* #1 in fleet fuel economy (2009).
* One of the few auto manufacturers to make its own six-speed AT (even GM partners with other companies for theirs).
I think that Japanese manufacturers have done these things, although I can't come up with any citations to prove this. (I'm supposed to be working.)
But how much does this matter anyway? Is there any evidence that suggests that "backward vertical integration", as Hyundai (or any other car maker, for that matter) practices it contributes significantly to the quality of the end product? As long as you're happy with your car's structural integrity, do you really care who made the steel that went into it?
Vertical integration was popular in North America & Western Europe in the late 19th & early 20th centuries, but most companies have moved away from it since the end of WWII. It's likely true that vertical integration is popular in Korea simply because that country is newly industrialized, relatively speaking, & that Korean companies will likewise move away from it as they & the Korean economy mature.
Does breaking features down into narrow subclasses like "mid-sized family sedan" kind of make them less significant? Remember who actually "first" innovated ESC, side bags, DI, etc.
* First auto manufacturer to offer life-saving ESC standard on a mid-sized family sedan (Sonata, early 2005).
* First auto manufacturer to offer DI engine standard on a mid-sized family sedan (Sonata, early 2010)
* #1 in fleet fuel economy (2009
not that it is inconsequential or unimportant but what you are talking about here is relatively high feature content you have traditionally found in all Korean vehicles and NOT anything that has to do with innovation or any 'new' developments that have differentiated the Korean products from those made elsewhere. In that respect, I contend that this is where the Koreans have traditionally been behind, only recently have they begun to catch up.
I guess some old people think everything is still 1902.
"There was a time when Cadillac truly ruled the luxury car market and truly did have great resale value. I'd say Cadillacs have had great resale value from at least the late 1940s through the late 1970s. "
which of you are still driving around in a 1940s' Cadillac?
"There was nothing as impressive as a 1950s or 1960s Cadillac."
just because you think so doesn't make it so.
just because you think so doesn't make it so.
Now I'm in my 50s and seem to remember Cadillac/GM behind about every meaningful advance in what were called automobiles through the 50s and well into the 60s.
Not so inconsequential things like real AC, ATs, PS/PB/PW among others
Can't testify to their resale values back then because I was obviously too young to buy them - only know that resales on the things have generally sucked since I have been buying cars.
What lemko says may easily be quite true: Cadillac, perhaps 60 years ago, was the STANDARD by which a luxury was measured - at least in this country. On a percentage basis they may indeed have held their value quite well at the time Remember that on that basis current BMWs also hold their values quite well - it's only when you put a pencil to total dollars depreciated that maybe you rethink :sick:
How much the D3 spends on R&D is up to you and me - we own 'em.
that's likely true.
But so what? how's that relevant for this discussion?
it is like the Chinese claiming that they were more than 50% of the world's GDP for majority of the human history. so what?
well, at least until the 1990s,
Cadillac has been in the bottom for a long time. and it isn't coming out anytime soon.
as long as UAW is making them, not many people will consider Cadillac.
The newest (2008) CTS is the best thing that Cadillac has done in 40 years. Can it restore the brand's reputation? I don't know about that. Too much has changed.
You've talked a lot about Honda. How many of their cars offer six-speed automatic transmissions? Certainly not their bread-and-butter Accord. Oh, it doesn't offer DI or 35 mpg highway either. Its idea of a hybrid sedan is the pitiful IMA system with ancient nickel metal hydride batteries. Hyundai's idea of a hybrid is a full hybrid system with innovative lithium polymer batteries (in the Sonata hybrid coming later this year). How many hybrid vehicles will be offered by other manufacturers in 2010 with lithium polymer batteries?
If Honda is so great with engineering, why can't they engineer a line of vehicles that can earn the highest average FE, like Hyundai just did? You'd think they would have left Hyundai in the dust, with their incredibly innovative powertrains vs. Hyundai's old crappy powertrains. Reality is different.
When it's anyone but Hyundai, it's "innovation." When it's Hyundai, it's just "feature content."
I think it's significant when a manufacturer offers a standard, important feature on the most popular type of vehicle, yes. Anyone can put a feature on a low-volume car like an MB S Class or Volvo S80. How many people benefit from that? But by being a leader in offering important safety features on mainstream vehicles, Hyundai forced (shamed?) other automakers to follow suit.
MB "innovated' poor quality electronics in luxury cars, too, but I don't see you mentioning that. Fortunately, Hyundai decided not to follow that path.
why should they?
a product is engineered so that it maximizes shareholder value. If achieving high FE does it, great.
if achieving high FE doesn't do it, a car company shouldn't deploy its resources to achieve high FE.
it is that simple.
plus, you shouldn't confuse a) a company doesn't do it with b) a company cannot do it.
They tried for 2009, and failed. To Hyundai. Honda did earn this distinction in the past, however. And when they did, they were quite proud about it, and obviously felt it would help them sell cars (therefore improve sales, and shareholder value): For example, see:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bY-CQw3-G0k
But let's follow your line of reasoning. By your line of reasoning, selling the Genesis sedan under the Hyundai brand is the right move for Hyundai if they think that approach maximizes shareholder value. Right? Also, we should not confuse a company that chooses not to sell the Genesis under a special brand and dealer organization from one that can't.
"Executive Privileges" (Feb. '10 issue of Motor Trend)
***The Acura RL places 7th out of a field of 8***
"...a five-speed automatic that came across as archaic among six- and seven-speeds. 'Transmission is weak in this field and only performs adequately.' "
I bought my Hyundai back in 2006, and the main reason I bought it was the standard
side airbags and ESC. The Camry 4cyl I drove cost more than the Sonata 6cyl, yet had no side air bags or ESC. The lack of standard safety features were a minor putoff, the exorbitant price of the upgrade to the Sonata's specs were outrageous.
I call it innovation when you're the first manufacturer not to fleece people with a costly package just to get a couple of safety features.
http://autos.sympatico.ca/Jeremy-Cato-Blog/1785/toyota-hyundai-nissan-and-gm-lea- d-auto-innovation
http://www.hybridcarblog.com/2009/07/hyundais-lithium-polymer-hits-real.html
There was no reference to the size of the manufacturer, simply the one to have the technology first on all vehicles. It could have been Bentley in 1996 for all I care, but it wasn't.
Those features available in highline cars is what enables them to benefit the rest. The early adopters bankroll the innovation. IIRC MB had a full line in the US with airbag and ABS in 1986. Automotive technology trickles down. Any evidence of other makers offering this stuff simply to keep pace with the swoopy H?
The next thing I'll see here is a claim that BMW copied the Hofmeister kink from the Genesis :shades:
The British 'innovated' poor quality electronics in luxury cars. Ever experience a 25-35 year old Jag? Makes keeping a model year 2000 S-class on the road look like operating a Camry :shades:
If you think MB is a good comparo to Hyundai, and way back in 1986, so be it. I think it's more appropriate to compare Hyundai to manufacturers like Toyota/Lexus, Honda/Acura, and Nissan/Infiniti.
Maybe MB can borrow from some of Hyundai's innovations to improve its lineup, e.g. fuel efficient DI engines (note that BMW is going to DI I4s on the 5 Series in a few years) and lithium polymer batteries for hybrids with less weight and more cargo space.
You're right, the British did innovate poor quality electronics in luxury cars. MB perfected them.
Hey! Mercedes copied the Genesis grille, except the Mercedes grille isn't all melted-looking and ugly.
Anyway, Mercedes could be the most innovative company of them all. They practically invented the automobile.
That one company in particular is the innovation leader through automotive history, doesn't matter whether some people want to admit it or not.
Expensive is relative. Hyundai can have some props for knocking some features down to a low price level, but this isn't innovation.
I never said MB was a good comparo to Hyundai at any point in time. You made a claim about a line with a feature, I found a line with the same feature at an earlier date. Market position was never part of the context. Many of the innovation and "first" claims being made here are tenuous at best, if not simply wrong.
We'll see if a specific Hyundai engine design is copied by anyone else (who put the first DI in production? Oh yeah, that pesky German star again :shades: ) and MB hasn't banked much on hybrids at all.
MB's quality and reliability rankings are still above many cars, many less complex cars in fact. You can pick a lot worse.
Lexus is a quality innovator, but when it comes to styling or technology, not so much.
I was, for one. their recent products do sell well. But I am not sure if I am that eager to get back into an Audi. Just not my cup of the tea, however fine they are.
LOL, that was already done, several years ago. How soon some of us forget. Remember the engine partnership between DaimlerChrysler, Mitsubishi, and Hyundai--with Hyundai as the design lead? Or how about this article:
http://www.egmcartech.com/2008/05/09/hyundai-may-sell-4-cylinder-engines-to-merc- - - edes-benz/
Mercedes-Benz is also showing interest in Hyundai’s engine technology. At the Beijing Motor Show this year, Lee recalled, Daimler boss Dieter Zetsche said that he would like to partner with Hyundai for four-cylinder engines.
But nothing is official yet, and Hyundai doesn’t seem too interested as Dr. (Hyun-Soon) Lee said “I am not sure we want to share our technology.”
As for MB not banking on hybrids, your information is out of date on that. For example, see:
http://www.hybridcars.com/vehicle/mercedes-benz-s400-hybrid.html
But notice how Hyundai has already leap-frogged MB on hybrid battery technology. MB has a lithium ion battery in its new $89,000 hybrid sedan, but Hyundai will offer even more advanced lithium polymer technology in its Sonata hybrid later this year--and for quite a bit less than $89,000 we can be sure.
You are incorrect that MB's quality and reliability rankings are still above those of "many" other brands. CR has only Land Rover and (former MB partner) Chrysler below MB in reliability, for auto manufacturers. About equal to GM. Far below the likes of Honda, Toyota, Subaru, Nissan, and... Hyundai. Brand-wise, Hyundai ranked 8th in CR's reliability rankings as of the 2009 Auto Issue, with MB 27th... ahead only of Jeep, Pontiac (now dead), Dodge, Cadillac, Chrysler, Saturn (now dead), and Land Rover.
Why do you expect this kind of feature content from Hyundai's low-end cars in all markets way back in 2001, when MB can't even offer safety features like side airbags as standard on its low-end cars like the Smart fortwo in all markets NOW? :confuse: Looks like a double standard to me.
So does that mean the claims of "innovation" by H are at best, a little exaggerated?
The Smart is a motorcycle with doors
So which MB engine has H technology? A rumor on some some weird indy site doesn't impress. Any validation of the less than perfect-decisionmaking Dr. Z begging H for tech?
Don't tell me my info is out of date...I'll wager you've never seen one of the S400s in the flesh. The S hybrid is a small volume model, probably existing in less than a 1:10 ratio compared to normal cars in this market, and much less in more advanced markets where excellent MB diesel engines exist in these cars. If the company was running with this tech, it would be doing more by now.
CR...the same people who don't understand how Adblu cars are maintained? They are less than trustworthy at best.
Almost right in the middle, ahead of many less than complex machines, including a Korean upstart :shades:
CR just publishes what their readers tell them so to discredit CR you will have to discredit their readers' experience or their data collection process.
BTW, in you view, should CR be more or less trusted than those who couldn't tell billions from millions?
We'll see if a specific Hyundai engine design is copied by anyone else...
"Anyone else" in this case includes DaimlerChrysler (now split up of course) and Mitsubishi. Try google or wikipedia to find out the engines that came out of that Hyundai-led partnership. It's not hard to find.
Re hybrids...
If the company was running with this tech, it would be doing more by now.
Apparently you didn't read that article I posted on the MB hybrids to the end, or you would have seen this:
More Benz Hybrids On The Way
The S400 BlueHybrid is far from the only Benz hybrid, however. The company is expected to release a “full hybrid’ version of its US-built ML sport utility that uses the Two-Mode Hybrid system, co-developed with GM, Chrysler, and BMW, by the end of this year as well. This will make the ML one of very few vehicles in the world offered with gasoline, hybrid, and diesel powertrains, since Benz introduced the 50-state ML320 Bluetec late last year.
As for JD Power... if you think it's great stuff that Hyundai beat out MB in their VDS, and also in their IQS, that's OK by me. It does demonstrate how Hyundai has moved up in the world, when they can best respected automakers like MB, BMW, Nissan, and Subaru in reliability and all nameplates except Lexus, Porsche, and Cadillac in initial quality.
As I said, if the company was running with the tech, it would be doing more by now. We have a very low volume luxoboat hybrid and a SUV hybrid, both of which will not be embraced in any numbers outside of the NA market. Go to Europe...hybrids haven't caught on.
I have never denied H has moved up, and I both applaud and admire how it has improved at an exponential rate over the past 20 years. IQS and similar surveys matter little to me...there are always problems with the methodology and subjectivity of the inputs. When H can make something as complex as an S-class or 7er, which performs and drives and rides and is designed at least as well, but has better scores, then I will give those survey numbers more merit.
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
And since you will never, ever, ever agree that Hyundai can (and has) made anything as complex as an S Class or 7 Series, and has better scores (ala 5 Series vs. Genesis per JD Power), I won't wait around for you to give any survey that shows Hyundai superior to the likes of MB or BMW any merit.
If I wanted a Genesis, I would buy one, I can certainly afford one...but I think my recreational driving style wouldn't make the car happy. :shades:
Well, since you seem to be incapable of doing that consistently, why should I try?
For example, first you bring up the point about whether Hyundai can make something as complex as an S Class. Then the next day you say that's irrelevant. Which is it? :confuse: Another example is, first you ask whether "anyone" would ever copy a Hyundai engine. Then when it's pointed out that has already been done, you start tossing in the qualifiers: oh, it needs to be MB that did the copying. Oh, and it needs to be something other than a "low-end" engine. It gets hard to have a conversation and provide answers to your questions, because the questions keep shifting. :sick:
Since you yourself brought up JD Power surveys to support one of your points, I find it strange that you totally dismiss their 2009 design survey in which the Genesis bested the 5 Series. AFAIK, JD Power does business on the Planet Earth, and surveyed inhabitants of same. Of course they are not "the same" cars. What a ridiculous notion if I ever heard it. But some people think they compete against each other. And as the JD Power design study found, quite a few people think the Genesis has a more appealing design than the 5 Series.
You're not a H fanboy?
Who has copied a H engine? Not gone into some joint venture or even licensing agreement, but who has made an effort to closely mimic a H-exclusive engine design?
I've never seen the 2009 JPD Design survey. Please link it for me. Seeing as the Genesis did mimic many 5er design themes, especially outside, I would expect some similarity in the rather vague and subjective term of "design".
Quite a few people believe in tooth fairies and easter bunnies, too :P
Or maybe it would be easier if I just admitted that the Genesis is at least 100% better than any 5er or E ever built, and that the Equus with its gorgeous styling and lovely hood ornament, will decimate anyone's desire to buy a S/7er/LS/A8 and anyone who does buy one of those cars is just stupid. There, that's better.
IMO there is at least as much "complexity" in some of the things Hyundai makes as in an S Class or 7 Series. Here are some examples:
Nice stretched Azera pic...from that angle you almost can't see the "I don't understand automotive styling" hood ornament. :shades:
That lack of reliability, which by all accounts is being left in the past, doesn't seem to have destroyed what remains arguably the most aspired to full line make on the planet. The star has more value than any automotive symbol, even if it needs polishing.
And I'd take a 00 S-class over an 88 Excel any day :P
If Hyundai ever could build a car to the same levels of complexity and sophistication as the Germans, I'll guarantee you that their reliability will suffer as well. 'Luxury' cars and reliability are almost a contradiction in terms, with the notable exception of most Lexus products.
However, what I don't understand is why he's now decided to slam Hyundai in this thread.
My former boss drives only S Class Mercedes. He continues to buy them, even though his cars always spend quite a bit of time in the shop, not for the mechanicals but the bells-and-whistles, but he doesn't complain about the downtime or the money spent. It all comes down to driving experience, aura, and prestige, not about overall reliability.
The engineering of the fintail-era MB, and the current models, is a totally different mind set. Once built by engineers for engineers, MB is now driven more by marketing and price. The engineering staff in Stuttgart doesn't have the influence on the build-quality of the vehicle as it once did.