Topic: 2011 Hyundai Elantra

[Jaeger]

Any info on the platform/suspension? IRS or torsion beam?

A more significant question, surely, than the availability and / or bundling of cruise control.

Car and Driver says it's a beam suspension:

Disc brakes reside at all corners. The front rotors grow 0.2 inch, to 11 overall, but the rears stay the same size. While the last Elantra was never a stellar handler, we’re interested to see how the 2011 behaves in comparison, as the rear suspension moves from a more costly multilink setup to a cheaper torsion-beam axle.

http://www.caranddriver.com/news/car/10q4/2011_hyundai_elantra_official_photos_and_info-auto_shows

Jaeger

[Dante]

If this info is accurate, it would be a confirmation of my expectations. It's a sound business decision no doubt about it and I bet the platform is not where Hyundai put their R&D money.

It's clear to me once again that Elantra is a better (to me) alternative to Corolla rather than Mazda3.

[dkaz]

Even though the margins per car is not there in the smaller cars, this is where the volume is. Hyundai definitely know not to ignore this segment... well other than the previous gen Elantra, blech.

One little quibble I have about the new Elantra... how small is the trunk opening?? I thought the Mazda 3 sedan was bad...

[ironwood]

What is the latest on when the new Elantra will hit the showrooms?

[Dante]

More details in the official Hyundai Press Release from LA Show.

http://www.autoblog.com/2010/11/18/2011-hyundai-elantra-40-mpg-from-14-830-la-2010/

In all fairness, if the stuff is more then PR smoke and mirrors and the test drives will confirme it, I think this is one hell of a compact car. Unknown reliability aside, on the paper, it looks like a better car than most of the class, at least on the non-sporty side.

[PJungnitsch]

To me it's what the next gen Civic should have looked like:

[CatsEye68]

To me it's what the next gen Civic should have looked like

But these days, if it's not butt-ugly, it's not a Honda.

[Sir Osis of Liver]

All Elantras come equipped with a new 1.8-liter four-cylinder engine from Hyundai producing 148 horsepower and 131 pound-feet of torque, and the six-speed row-it-yourself gearbox is only available on the bottom-end GLS model – a new six-speed automatic is standard with all other GLS and Limited Elantras. What's more, all Elantras are able to achieve 29/40 miles per gallon (city/highway).

 

http://www.autoblog.com/2010/11/18/2011-hyundai-elantra-40-mpg-from-14-830-la-2010/

[Erik]

All Elantras come equipped with a new 1.8-liter four-cylinder engine from Hyundai producing 148 horsepower and 131 pound-feet of torque, and the six-speed row-it-yourself gearbox is only available on the bottom-end GLS model – a new six-speed automatic is standard with all other GLS and Limited Elantras. What's more, all Elantras are able to achieve 29/40 miles per gallon (city/highway).

 

http://www.autoblog.com/2010/11/18/2011-hyundai-elantra-40-mpg-from-14-830-la-2010/

Sad. At least it confirms that Hyundai is not hunting for the performance market.

[conwelpic]

Elantra preview from November 18th from Car Connection

http://www.thecarconnection.com/marty-blog/1051686_2011-hyundai-elantra-preview

[Mitlov]

I always thought the Elantra was chasing the Corolla/Cruze market, not the Mazda3/Focus/Civic market, so I'm not surprised about the torsion beam rear suspension and relative lack of three-pedal options.

[Ice]

I always thought the Elantra was chasing the Corolla/Cruze market, not the Mazda3/Focus/Civic market, so I'm not surprised about the torsion beam rear suspension and relative lack of three-pedal options.

You'd be a winner there. Elantra tries to come up the middle but it's definitely on the Corolla side of the middle.

[Bubba]

Canadian fuel consumption results.
City:     6.8 L/100 km (42 mi./gal.)
Hwy:     4.9 L/100 km (58 mi./gal.)

http://oee.nrcan.gc.ca/transportation/tools/fuelratings/ratings-details.cfm?id=78323

[dkaz]

Corolla what? Cruze Eco what?

I seriously hope that the manual transmission is not limited to a stripper base model.

[Shnak]

Canadian fuel consumption results.
City:     6.8 L/100 km (42 mi./gal.)
Hwy:     4.9 L/100 km (58 mi./gal.)

http://oee.nrcan.gc.ca/transportation/tools/fuelratings/ratings-details.cfm?id=78323

Very similar to the Cruze Eco who got 7.2L/100km (39 mi./gal.) & 4.6L//100km (61 mi./gal.). I think it's pretty funny that GM needs special tricks on the Cruze to get these numbers when every Elantra basically equals it without any of those tricks.

Here are the numbers with automatic transmissions:
Elantra 1.8L:      6.9  4.9
Cruze Eco 1.4L:  7.8  5.1  
Civic 1.8L:         8.2  5.7
Cruze 1.4L:        8.5  5.5
Cruze 1.8L:        9.2  5.6  
Corolla 1.8L:       9.4  6.5

The Cruze Eco takes a big hit with the automatic transmission (7.8 / 5.1) vs the manual transmission (7.2 / 4.6), while the others are all very close with both transmissions. Same thing with the Cruze 1.8L (Goes from 7.8/5.4 to 9.2/5.6) and Cruze 1.4L (7.8/5.4 to 8.5/5.5). So yeah, it's nice that GM can advertise the very good fuel economy numbers of the manual Cruze's... but the reality is that most of them sold will be automatics with the much worse fuel economy.

[Dante]

Not that I put much weight on those numbers, but since they've been posted and used as a basis for comments here, I'll use them too.

Civic and Corolla have been the benchmark for fuel economy in this class for a long time and if GM used any competitors as benchmarks in their product development process, I bet those two have been included. So let's see how they compare (use the Cruze model believed to be the volume seller):

Civic 1.8L:         8.2  5.7
Cruze 1.4L:        8.5  5.5
Corolla 1.8L:       9.4  6.5

By the numbers, it looks like GM had surprisingly succeeded, despite Cruze being a much heavier car (quieter, better ride and more solid feel too).

Sure, the new Elantra is raising the bar and I would give Hyundai full credit for doing that, but this is normal. I'm sure Toyota, Honda and others will not stand still and the cycle will continue.

[Shnak]

So you're saying GM only aimed to beat 3-4 year old models when they were working on the Cruze? I'm not sure how that makes sense. What happens when the new Corolla and Civic get her in a year or two and trump the Cruze? The Cruze will be close to class-trailing for its fuel economy, even the Cruze Eco!

Shouldn't they have aimed to outdo everything out there by a decent margin? Especially the Cruze Eco! That's the main goal of that model! I mean, what's the point of all the extra tricks (and $$$) going into the Eco model if it can't even beat a base Elantra costing thousands less?

[Dante]

So you're saying GM only aimed to beat 3-4 year old models when they were working on the Cruze? I'm not sure how that makes sense. What happens when the new Corolla and Civic get her in a year or two and trump the Cruze? The Cruze will be close to class-trailing for its fuel economy, even the Cruze Eco!

Shouldn't they have aimed to outdo everything out there by a decent margin? Especially the Cruze Eco! That's the main goal of that model! I mean, what's the point of all the extra tricks (and $$$) going into the Eco model if it can't even beat a base Elantra costing thousands less?

Looking at the numbers, they beat Corolla (the benchmark in US market) by a good margin in FE, while beating them on other areas too.  Corolla came out around the same time as the global Cruze (2009 MY) IIRC so, NO, they did not benchmark an old model.
The new Elantra is not on the market yet, not to mention it wasn't even close in 2008-2009.

New models are coming out every year and no manufacturer will invest heavily just in case the next guy will best them by a small margin in one or few areas.

Do you think Honda will not release their new Civic because it cannot beat the new Elantra FE? I don't think so. Life goes on and they will all sell cars.
Do you imagine that all compact buyers will run now to the nearest Hyundai store and buy a new Elantra because it has the best in class fuel economy on the sticker? Again, I don't think so.

No business makes its goal in being the best at everything unless it brings them profit. They always do a cost-benefit analysis before spending money.

[dkaz]

Corolla 1.8L:       9.4  6.5

NRCAN mixed up the 1.8L and 2.4L ratings. 9.4/6.5 is for the 2.4L auto. The 1.8 with auto should be 7.8/5.7, 7.4/5.6 with manual.

[Shnak]

Corolla 1.8L:       9.4  6.5

NRCAN mixed up the 1.8L and 2.4L ratings. 9.4/6.5 is for the 2.4L auto. The 1.8 with auto should be 7.8/5.7, 7.4/5.6 with manual.

Ahh that makes sense. I thought 9's was awfully high for the Corolla 1.8L. Thanks for the correction.

With the correction to the Corolla numbers, here are actual numbers for automatic transmissions:
Elantra 1.8L:      6.9  4.9
Cruze Eco 1.4L:  7.8  5.1 
Corolla 1.8L:       7.8  5.7
Civic 1.8L:         8.2  5.7
Cruze 1.4L:        8.5  5.5
Cruze 1.8L:        9.2  5.6 

It makes the Cruze Eco look even worse, IMO.