carguy123 wrote: From what I've seen of them it's a matter of they look good on paper, but the execution doesn't quite seem to live up to the specs.
this probably has a good bit to do with it. g/f test drove one and the ride felt a lot like z32 nissan or C4 vette, meaning it would probably be great for backroad fun, but brutal in day to day driving, especially in houston
^ I don't agree with that... then again I think the C4's Z51 suspension doesn't ride that bad either. I personally thought the only thing the R-Spec 2.0T I ran needed was about 40hp. Balance felt great on street tires, car rotated and was very predictable.
"the ride felt a lot like z32 nissan or C4 vette"
These two things are not alike. The C4, particularly early ones, would shake your fillings loose. In comparison, the Nissan has a smooth supple ride.
A bit of topic but I looked at Hyundai's website. I didn't realize they had a car that cost $58k. Do they really think that is going to sell? I mean if I had $58k to spend on a car I would be berkeleyed if I spent it on a Hyundai.
In reply to That idiot who can't spell:
It is supposed to compete with a $90K Lexus. C&D says it is just as good, except presumably when you try to impress your friends.
That idiot who can't spell wrote: A bit of topic but I looked at Hyundai's website. I didn't realize they had a car that cost $58k. Do they really think that is going to sell? I mean if I had $58k to spend on a car I would be berkeleyed if I spent it on a Hyundai.
Have you seen it's features or marketing? They don't have them in dealers, they bring one to you. The owner's manual is an iPad and you can schedule services through it, where again they come and get the car. It beat the $100+ Lexus head-to-head man! Of equal consideration is also that A: it doesn't say Hyundai or have the H anywhere on it and B: a lot of wealthy people are looking to tone down their rides for fear of the peasents revolting around them, and for that this car is invisible.
In reply to Javelin:
Damn peasants. Always going crazy with the revolting. It is almost as bad as the zombies and the skin eating.
Otto Maddox wrote: In reply to That idiot who can't spell: It is supposed to compete with a $90K Lexus. C&D says it is just as good, except presumably when you try to impress your friends.
I wouldn't spend $90k on a tarted up Toyota either.
Maybe I am bit weird but all the Japanese (and I guess Korean) luxury cars seem really tacky when compared to the European offerings.
I agree, but they're still worth a crap when they have 100k miles on them on the used market, so that works for me. 
From what I've read, Hyundai sold 196 Equus (Equii? Equus's?) in December.
I know the one I used to work for had 3 pre-sold. I (and the salesman) was shocked.
92CelicaHalfTrac wrote:Tom Heath wrote: Kinda OT, but I'm deeply suspicious of some of the times that Paul is referencing (from an unnamed source, of course.)Car & Driver is the source. The times are what they are, i'm just more suspicious of some of the results. I bet if another magazine did the same test (like GRM), there would be some shakeups in there.
Yeah, if GRM did the test a Miata would win, with either a Honda minivan or Ridgeline a close second.
I was pretty interested in the Genesis Coupe 2.0L R-Spec as a possible future replacement for my Mazdaspeed3, but as everyone else here has said the engine is a letdown, both in raw numbers and in power delivery. I wish Hyundai would drop the 274hp Sonata Turbo engine into it and keep it at the current price- I'm sure that would make it a phenomenal bargain. The Genny Coupe is one of those cars that I want to like but is missing that certain "something." It would be nice to have an alternative to the 2011+ Mustang V-6. Refreshed Genesis, FT-86, Miata coupe, 240SX revival- I just want a sporty, economical, tin-top RWD car that can handle well and haul a respectable amount of stuff.
BTW, has anyone noticed that the V-6 Mustang with the handling package does not exist? Sure, you can build one on Ford's website, but if you want to test-drive one to see how a Handling Package Mustang, well, handles, you're SOL.
The Car and Driver article mentioned that the V6 Mustang had a 114mph speed limiter, and spent 15 seconds bouncing off it during the lap. If it didn't have a speed limiter I wonder how close it would have gotten to the V8 Mustang. It was only 4 seconds off the pace in this test.
Actually, I'm going to be a bit of a geek and make an estimate. The V6 Mustang went 4.1 miles in 3:12.5. It traveled 15s at 114mph, or a distance of 0.475 miles. If over that 0.475 miles the Mustang V6 could have averaged 7.5mph faster, it would have covered that distance in 14.1 seconds, cutting 0.9 seconds off it's time. So with no speed limiter, it could have done the lap in 3:11.6, putting it only 1.1 second behind the EVO but still 3 seconds behind the V8 Mustang.
I like the Genesis Coupe and hope its sales do pick up, though I'm a Ford guy at heart so I really hope it doesn't steal sales from the Mustang. Mostly I'm hoping its sales pick up because I'm really curious if the rumours of the next generation Coupe having the 5L V8 are true - that would be pretty exciting.
The Equus, as Javelin mentioned is damn impressive. I'm really curious how well it will do. The Phaeton didn't do well for VW but it was much more expensive. Toyota was able to do great things with Lexus, but I think the different brand separating it from other Toyotas probably helped a bit with the "what will the neighbours think".
Bob
The R-Spec 2.0T needs more power and less weight.
3200lbs and 210hp or whatever? So 50less than my FWD Turbo minivan (speed3)? That's just not going to get it done.
Depending on the final specs of the FT-86 and how close the bodylines stay to the concept, I'll ditch the pratical nature of my Speed in a hearbeat.
I see them daily, even in the winter around here. Every time I see one, I think to myself "damn that looks nice - much better than a 370z)
forzav12 wrote:92CelicaHalfTrac wrote:Yeah, if GRM did the test a Miata would win, with either a Honda minivan or Ridgeline a close second.Tom Heath wrote: Kinda OT, but I'm deeply suspicious of some of the times that Paul is referencing (from an unnamed source, of course.)Car & Driver is the source. The times are what they are, i'm just more suspicious of some of the results. I bet if another magazine did the same test (like GRM), there would be some shakeups in there.
Obvious troll is obvious.
if i was in the market for a large luxury coupe, i'd be all over an Equus.*
*OK, that's a lie b/c I'd be all over a CTS-V, but assuming i didn't like driving that much and could spend $60k on the Equus or $90+k on something similar, sign me up for the Hyundai.
z31maniac wrote: The R-Spec 2.0T needs more power and less weight. 3200lbs and 210hp or whatever? So 50less than my FWD Turbo minivan (speed3)? That's just not going to get it done. Depending on the final specs of the FT-86 and how close the bodylines stay to the concept, I'll ditch the pratical nature of my Speed in a hearbeat.
i think it is slated to get the 274hp GDI turbo engine this year or next...that will be a big improvement.
until then i'll stick w/ my magik triangles. 
Buzz Killington wrote: if i was in the market for a large luxury coupe, i'd be all over an Equus.* *OK, that's a lie b/c I'd be all over a CTS-V, but assuming i didn't like driving that much and could spend $60k on the Equus or $90+k on something similar, sign me up for the Hyundai.z31maniac wrote: The R-Spec 2.0T needs more power and less weight. 3200lbs and 210hp or whatever? So 50less than my FWD Turbo minivan (speed3)? That's just not going to get it done. Depending on the final specs of the FT-86 and how close the bodylines stay to the concept, I'll ditch the pratical nature of my Speed in a hearbeat.i think it is slated to get the 274hp GDI turbo engine this year or next...that will be a big improvement. until then i'll stick w/ my magik triangles.
Agreed, the obvious choice would be the V. Lacking that option and only having 60K, I still leave the copy at the dock and choose a couple year old S class.
mtn wrote:forzav12 wrote:Obvious troll is obvious.92CelicaHalfTrac wrote:Yeah, if GRM did the test a Miata would win, with either a Honda minivan or Ridgeline a close second.Tom Heath wrote: Kinda OT, but I'm deeply suspicious of some of the times that Paul is referencing (from an unnamed source, of course.)Car & Driver is the source. The times are what they are, i'm just more suspicious of some of the results. I bet if another magazine did the same test (like GRM), there would be some shakeups in there.
Oh, relax.
mtn wrote:forzav12 wrote:Obvious troll is obvious.92CelicaHalfTrac wrote:Yeah, if GRM did the test a Miata would win, with either a Honda minivan or Ridgeline a close second.Tom Heath wrote: Kinda OT, but I'm deeply suspicious of some of the times that Paul is referencing (from an unnamed source, of course.)Car & Driver is the source. The times are what they are, i'm just more suspicious of some of the results. I bet if another magazine did the same test (like GRM), there would be some shakeups in there.
Forza isn't a troll.....with the hardware he has and has had I value his opinion. At least he has experience with most of the cars he chimes in on.
I chuckled at the ridgeline comment because of all the fawning grm has done on it in the past. Especially when it's sales are such garbage.
Cotton wrote: I chuckled at the ridgeline comment because of all the fawning grm has done on it in the past. Especially when it's sales are such garbage.
Ditto. Funny stuff!
Bryce
Nashco wrote:Cotton wrote: I chuckled at the ridgeline comment because of all the fawning grm has done on it in the past. Especially when it's sales are such garbage.Ditto. Funny stuff! Bryce
Uh, people can like cars, even if they don't sell well.
Say, like a Hyundai i've heard about.
In reply to Datsun1500:
Yeah, but Hyundais are generally reliable. VW can't even make a reliable Jetta.
You'll need to log in to post.
