Topic: Hyundai Genesis Coupe First Drive

[Erik]

It does offer a lot more. A 300hp Camaro limited to 155mph, , compared to a 137mph Genesis Coupe does seem like a lot more car to me than for only $2K more.

  Good luck finding a place to drive either car at it's limits

A perfect example of what Ovr said about people boasting about things that don't matter to the average or even talented driver.

Hold on now.
This is a sports car. A PERFORMANCE car. Comparisons of performance are always things that matter to car enthusiasts. Do you really think that rrocket built that incredibly, wickedly awesome Toyota Supra and drives it like a Toyota Echo?
Dang, I thought this was a car enthusiast website! Like for  people who enjoy driving, and particularly, fast cars.
Holy cow!

Can I offer you guys some other forums to read if fast cars are a problem?

How about:
http://www.accountingblock.com/

http://www.virtualstampclub.com/

http://www.cointalk.com/forum/

Here's a nice forum on discussion of plastics. Near and dear to the hearts of many here:

http://www.plastemart.com/discussion.asp

And here we have the Society of Plastics Engineers discussion forum. Whole section there on automotive plastics:

http://www.4spe.org/forum


Incredible!

[quadzilla]

Hold on now.
This is a sports car. A PERFORMANCE car. Comparisons of performance are always things that matter to car enthusiasts. Do you really think that rrocket built that incredibly, wickedly awesome Toyota Supra and drives it like a Toyota Echo?
Dang, I thought this was a car enthusiast website! Like for  people who enjoy driving, and particularly, fast cars.
Holy cow!

You should have picked a better example as he actually drives it on a race track.

[Snowman]

It does offer a lot more. A 300hp Camaro limited to 155mph, , compared to a 137mph Genesis Coupe does seem like a lot more car to me than for only $2K more.

  Good luck finding a place to drive either car at it's limits

A perfect example of what Ovr said about people boasting about things that don't matter to the average or even talented driver.

Hold on now.
This is a sports car. A PERFORMANCE car. Comparisons of performance are always things that matter to car enthusiasts. Do you really think that rrocket built that incredibly, wickedly awesome Toyota Supra and drives it like a Toyota Echo?
Dang, I thought this was a car enthusiast website! Like for  people who enjoy driving, and particularly, fast cars.
Holy cow!

Can I offer you guys some other forums to read if fast cars are a problem?

How about:
http://www.accountingblock.com/

http://www.virtualstampclub.com/

http://www.cointalk.com/forum/

Here's a nice forum on discussion of plastics. Near and dear to the hearts of many here:

http://www.plastemart.com/discussion.asp

And here we have the Society of Plastics Engineers discussion forum. Whole section there on automotive plastics:

http://www.4spe.org/forum


Incredible!

 

[Jaeger]

Constantly.
I like reading the posts of one of the few people on this board I am always in agreement with.

Now THAT I believe. 

J aeger is happy jumping from thread to thread butting heads with Sir Osis of Liver, Mitlov, Erik, etc. Want a piece of me? 

What piece are you offering?

Jaeger

My brain, clearly yours is not functioning properly.

Yep - posts like yours definitely elevate the discussion.  I will do my best to follow your fine example. 

Jaeger

[dougjp]

Re: Hyundai Genesis Coupe First Drive

Get it? 

[Snowman]

Constantly.
I like reading the posts of one of the few people on this board I am always in agreement with.

Now THAT I believe. 

J aeger is happy jumping from thread to thread butting heads with Sir Osis of Liver, Mitlov, Erik, etc. Want a piece of me? 

What piece are you offering?

Jaeger

My brain, clearly yours is not functioning properly.

Yep - posts like yours definitely elevate the discussion.  I will do my best to follow your fine example. 

Jaeger

You can try, but with that lame rebuttal I have my doubts. 

[vdk]

Hyundai CEO says early Genesis Coupe sales numbers are "simply smoking".

And so it should.

http://wot.motortrend.com/6485334/auto-news/hyundai-ceo-genesis-coupe-sales-are-smoking-38-gt-is-volume-leader/index.html

[aquadorhj]

so, none of us "normal" non-press folks have driven this yet?

what gives, guys?  hustle some motivation to call your local dealer and snag a test drive!!

and report back ASAP!!      <- thumbs up in advance.   

as to interior...  camaro interior isn't so bad..  looks some what crappy, and feels like normal chevy( like cobalt.. )  but the exterior is FINE looking to say the least.
can't say i dig the instrument panel...

genesis..  the interior is pretty good.  some obvious cost cutting compared to it's namesake sedan counterpart.   but far below infiniti.  (as it should, considering the price).

[vdk]

Dyno Test 2.0T 

And guess what.. it's underrated.

197hp@6000rpm
227tq@2500rpm


http://blogs.edmunds.com/straightline/2009/03/inside-line-dyno-test-2010-hyundai-genesis-coupe-20t.html?tid=edmunds.il.home.photopanel..2.*

[Snowman]

It states that these are flywheel numbers. They are okay but nothing to gush about.

[safristi]

..wasn't long ago that 100HP per Litre was a big  woop de doo...................

[toolatecrew]

It states that these are flywheel numbers. They are okay but nothing to gush about.

Not to be picky but I read it differently
[quoteHyundai says its 2.0-liter turbocharged four-cylinder generates 210 hp and 223 lb-ft of torque at the flywheel, and like most factory ratings for turbo cars, those numbers are a bit on the conservative side. [/quote]

The 197 and 227 are measured at the wheels so after drivetrain loss its putting out maybe 217-225 at the flywheel.

VW Audi 2.0 Turbo is well regarded as very powerful and it is only rated at 200 HP SAE @ 5,100 rpm; 207 ft lb

So the Genesis Turbo has a substantial torque advantage and most likely a slight HP advantage. I'd say that's impressive.

[von_khan]

Constantly.
I like reading the posts of one of the few people on this board I am always in agreement with.

Now THAT I believe. 

J aeger is happy jumping from thread to thread butting heads with Sir Osis of Liver, Mitlov, Erik, etc. Want a piece of me? 

What piece are you offering?

Jaeger

My brain, clearly yours is not functioning properly.

 

[Snowman]

It states that these are flywheel numbers. They are okay but nothing to gush about.

Not to be picky but I read it differently
[quoteHyundai says its 2.0-liter turbocharged four-cylinder generates 210 hp and 223 lb-ft of torque at the flywheel, and like most factory ratings for turbo cars, those numbers are a bit on the conservative side.

The 197 and 227 are measured at the wheels so after drivetrain loss its putting out maybe 217-225 at the flywheel.

VW Audi 2.0 Turbo is well regarded as very powerful and it is only rated at 200 HP SAE @ 5,100 rpm; 207 ft lb

So the Genesis Turbo has a substantial torque advantage and most likely a slight HP advantage. I'd say that's impressive.




[/quote]


Thoes numbers would be close to the OEM numbers on my 2002 WRX, good for 2002 but I was hoping for something closer to the WRX 265 or Mazdaspeed3 in the +/-250 HP range.

[toolatecrew]

It states that these are flywheel numbers. They are okay but nothing to gush about.

Not to be picky but I read it differently
[quoteHyundai says its 2.0-liter turbocharged four-cylinder generates 210 hp and 223 lb-ft of torque at the flywheel, and like most factory ratings for turbo cars, those numbers are a bit on the conservative side.

The 197 and 227 are measured at the wheels so after drivetrain loss its putting out maybe 217-225 at the flywheel.

VW Audi 2.0 Turbo is well regarded as very powerful and it is only rated at 200 HP SAE @ 5,100 rpm; 207 ft lb

So the Genesis Turbo has a substantial torque advantage and most likely a slight HP advantage. I'd say that's impressive.

Thoes numbers would be close to the OEM numbers on my 2002 WRX, good for 2002 but I was hoping for something closer to the WRX 265 or Mazdaspeed3 in the +/-250 HP range.
[/quote]

The WRX 265 is a 2.5 and the Mazda is a 2.3 . Not sure if its fair to expect the same power from a 2.0l engine.

But C/D had this to say:

One thing is certain: There will be lots of zoom parts available. The 1998cc four is the same basic engine as in the 291-hp Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution, both engines being byproducts of the Global Engine Manufacturing Alliance, a joint venture among Hyundai, Mitsubishi, and Chrysler.

Similarities outweigh the differences, we’re told, between the Evo’s motor and Hyundai’s all-aluminum Theta four with its twin-cam variable valve timing and Mitsubishi TD04H turbo making 15.0 psi. Core components such as pistons and rods should move freely between them, for example. Hyundai’s engine uses a different computer, from Siemens. The software wasn’t intentionally made easy to crack, “but it’s not very tough,” says one Hyundai exec with a wink. That means up to 300 horsepower should be possible without major surgery.

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/hot_lists/car_shopping/the_coupe_coop/2010_hyundai_genesis_coupe_2_0t_turbo_short_take_road_test

Its the BASE engine on the base coupe. Its already class leading for power in terms of 2.0 Turbo engines.  If you Compare it to the BASE 2.5 Turbo WRX at 224 HP its right there.

I'll guess that some type of perfomance version with closer to 250 from the 2.0 is a possibilty soon Just a guess though I have nothing to back it up

[Jaeger]

Thoes numbers would be close to the OEM numbers on my 2002 WRX, good for 2002 but I was hoping for something closer to the WRX 265 or Mazdaspeed3 in the +/-250 HP range.

Those are both larger displacement fours to begin with.  I don't find the numbers produced by the stock 2.0 liter Genesis motor to be disappointing at all.  More would be nice, sure.  But this isn't bad at all from a small turbo 4.  I'm more keen to hear about throttle response and overall driveability versus peak numbers.

Jaeger

[Dante]

Thoes numbers would be close to the OEM numbers on my 2002 WRX, good for 2002 but I was hoping for something closer to the WRX 265 or Mazdaspeed3 in the +/-250 HP range.

Those are both larger displacement fours to begin with.  I don't find the numbers produced by the stock 2.0 liter Genesis motor to be disappointing at all.  More would be nice, sure.  But this isn't bad at all from a small turbo 4.  I'm more keen to hear about throttle response and overall driveability versus peak numbers.

Jaeger

Not really disappointing, but there are others stock 2.0L I4 Turbo that offer more power - Cobalt SS, Mitsu Ralliart, Evo.  210 hp from a 2.0L Turbo is on the low side although perhaps it's enough for moving the car fairly quick.

[Snowman]

  Geez….read my post fer fack sakes. I said the numbers were good, not disappointing. My 2002 WRX was a 2.0l engine with 227 HP!!!!!!For 2002 that was exciting but we are in 2009 now, that is just average!!!!

[Jaeger]

Not really disappointing, but there are others stock 2.0L I4 Turbo that offer more power - Cobalt SS, Mitsu Ralliart, Evo.  210 hp from a 2.0L Turbo is on the low side although perhaps it's enough for moving the car fairly quick.

Further to toolatecrew's point, I haven't heard Audi's 2.0T criticized much for being "on the low side" - not even right here in 2009.  And as I said - driveability is much more significant than bragging rights for peak numbers.  Looking forward to reading more about how this thing performs with the turbo 4.

Geez….read my post fer fack sakes. I said the numbers were good, not disappointing. My 2002 WRX was a 2.0l engine with 227 HP!!!!!!For 2002 that was exciting but we are in 2009 now, that is just average!!!!

Perhaps you would get your point across more clearly if you used a few more emoticons and exclamation marks.

Jaeger

[toolatecrew]

Geez….read my post fer fack sakes. I said the numbers were good, not disappointing. My 2002 WRX was a 2.0l engine with 227 HP!!!!!!For 2002 that was exciting but we are in 2009 now, that is just average!!!!

Sorry I got the impression you were "expecting more"

but I was hoping for something closer to the WRX 265 or Mazdaspeed3 in the +/-250 HP range.

If you were hoping for more but didn't get it doesn't it mean your are "disapointe"

As I pointed out this is also comperable HP to the current BASE WRX 2.5 Turbo 220hp in 2009.

The 2.0l WRX made 217 ft-lbs. at the flywheel the Genis 2.0 makes 227 lb feet at the wheels. That's a notable improvment.

All I'm saying is that its a base 2.0l engine and it outproduces many base 2,0 T engines and is comperable in output to some 2.5 L T BASE engines. It doesn't seem reasonable to expect it to produce comperable power to a upgraded 2.5 l turbo.

The only  2 2.0Ts that outperforms it is the 2.0 in the Mitsubishi Ralliart. It produces an extra 27 HP..but it costs 7,000$ more.

The 2.0T Cobalt SS is much more powerful. 260Hp. That I would think is a fair comparison. Its the same price range. I'd buy that as a debate I guess.